document_id
int64 185
2.68k
| context
stringlengths 2.88k
70.8k
| question
stringlengths 11
194
| id
int64 225
5.32k
| answer
stringlengths 1
933
| answer_start
int64 157
69k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | Has AAV been studied as vectors for influenza? | 1,563 | There are limited studies | 14,703 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What are alphaviruses? | 1,564 | positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family | 16,320 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What are some alphavirus vectors that have been developed? | 1,565 | Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses | 16,467 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | How do the alphavirus vectors work? | 1,566 | The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material. | 16,634 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | How do the alphavirus vectors work? | 1,567 | The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. | 16,796 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What is an important feature of the replicon system? | 1,568 | the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels | 16,918 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | How did the VEE based replicon system incorporating HA from PR8perform? | 1,569 | demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine | 17,247 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | Why is the VEE replicon system particularly appealing? | 1,570 | the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses | 18,262 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What is the advantage of the VEE replicon system? | 1,571 | VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies | 18,378 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What were the VRPs derived from VEE developed for? | 1,572 | as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV) | 18,710 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What did the clinical trial with CMV VRP show? | 1,573 | vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe | 18,812 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What did the clinical trial with VRP show? | 1,574 | vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost | 19,091 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | Which baculovirus vaccine has been approved for
human use? | 1,575 | baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season | 19,506 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What is the advantage of baculoviruses? | 1,576 | readily manipulated | 19,888 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What is the advantage of baculovirus vectors? | 1,577 | The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells | 19,909 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | How can baculovirus vectors be improved? | 1,578 | While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors. | 20,111 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | what baculovirus vector based immunization provided protection from lethal challenge? | 1,580 | only intranasal immunization | 20,639 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What was the benefit of the robust innate immune response to baculovirus vector? | 1,581 | non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection | 20,884 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What is the Newcastle disease virus? | 1,582 | a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. | 22,733 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What are the appealing qualities of the NDV vector? | 1,583 | As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. | 22,870 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What is the appealing quality of the NDV vector? | 1,584 | As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. | 23,022 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What is the appealing quality of the NDV vector? | 1,585 | pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector | 23,396 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What did the first report on the NDV vector test conclude? | 1,586 | it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection | 24,174 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What is the added protection of NDV vector? | 1,587 | providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection. | 24,545 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What have the limited NDV human trails shown? | 1,588 | the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously | 25,083 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What are the attractive features of the PIV5 vector? | 1,589 | PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs | 25,629 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What was the result of the test of efficacy of PIV5 in murine challenge? | 1,590 | Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge | 27,081 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What opportunity has the termination of smallpox vaccination provided? | 1,636 | has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns | 28,943 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What vaccinia vectors were created to address safety concerns? | 1,637 | The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames | 29,857 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | How safe is MVA? | 1,638 | MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans | 31,858 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What is the status of MVA influenza vaccine? | 1,639 | results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine. | 32,247 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What is NYVAC? | 1,640 | The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted | 32,395 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | How is NYVAC grown? | 1,642 | in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage | 32,509 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | How safe is NYVAC? | 1,643 | NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages | 32,720 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What would limit the use of poxvirus vectored vaccines? | 1,644 | current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains | 33,773 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | what is the advantage of the NYVAC as an influenza virus? | 1,645 | immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity | 34,111 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | Where is poxvirus vaccine being used? | 1,646 | licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively | 34,414 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What have the studies on NP shown for the protection against influenza challege? | 1,647 | immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses | 39,054 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What is the goal of vaccine? | 1,648 | protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population | 41,133 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What has enabled the development of one size fits all vaccine? | 1,649 | recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. | 41,639 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | Why is a revision of current vaccines is needed? | 1,650 | strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum | 41,899 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What is an example of an improved vaccine regime? | 1,651 | a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity | 42,055 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What can provide an improved vaccine regime? | 1,652 | Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses | 42,323 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What features can be created for creating vectored vaccines? | 1,653 | full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. | 42,497 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | How can sustained immunity be generated? | 1,654 | induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract | 42,835 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What is the advantage of vectored vaccines? | 1,655 | generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells | 43,025 |
1,719 | Virus-Vectored Influenza Virus Vaccines
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4147686/
SHA: f6d2afb2ec44d8656972ea79f8a833143bbeb42b
Authors: Tripp, Ralph A.; Tompkins, S. Mark
Date: 2014-08-07
DOI: 10.3390/v6083055
License: cc-by
Abstract: Despite the availability of an inactivated vaccine that has been licensed for >50 years, the influenza virus continues to cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. Constant evolution of circulating influenza virus strains and the emergence of new strains diminishes the effectiveness of annual vaccines that rely on a match with circulating influenza strains. Thus, there is a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection to avoid the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Recombinant virus-vectored vaccines are an appealing alternative to classical inactivated vaccines because virus vectors enable native expression of influenza antigens, even from virulent influenza viruses, while expressed in the context of the vector that can improve immunogenicity. In addition, a vectored vaccine often enables delivery of the vaccine to sites of inductive immunity such as the respiratory tract enabling protection from influenza virus infection. Moreover, the ability to readily manipulate virus vectors to produce novel influenza vaccines may provide the quickest path toward a universal vaccine protecting against all influenza viruses. This review will discuss experimental virus-vectored vaccines for use in humans, comparing them to licensed vaccines and the hurdles faced for licensure of these next-generation influenza virus vaccines.
Text: Seasonal influenza is a worldwide health problem causing high mobility and substantial mortality [1] [2] [3] [4] . Moreover, influenza infection often worsens preexisting medical conditions [5] [6] [7] . Vaccines against circulating influenza strains are available and updated annually, but many issues are still present, including low efficacy in the populations at greatest risk of complications from influenza virus infection, i.e., the young and elderly [8, 9] . Despite increasing vaccination rates, influenza-related hospitalizations are increasing [8, 10] , and substantial drug resistance has developed to two of the four currently approved anti-viral drugs [11, 12] . While adjuvants have the potential to improve efficacy and availability of current inactivated vaccines, live-attenuated and virus-vectored vaccines are still considered one of the best options for the induction of broad and efficacious immunity to the influenza virus [13] .
The general types of influenza vaccines available in the United States are trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV), quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV; in trivalent and quadrivalent forms). There are three types of inactivated vaccines that include whole virus inactivated, split virus inactivated, and subunit vaccines. In split virus vaccines, the virus is disrupted by a detergent. In subunit vaccines, HA and NA have been further purified by removal of other viral components. TIV is administered intramuscularly and contains three or four inactivated viruses, i.e., two type A strains (H1 and H3) and one or two type B strains. TIV efficacy is measured by induction of humoral responses to the hemagglutinin (HA) protein, the major surface and attachment glycoprotein on influenza. Serum antibody responses to HA are measured by the hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) assay, and the strain-specific HI titer is considered the gold-standard correlate of immunity to influenza where a four-fold increase in titer post-vaccination, or a HI titer of ≥1:40 is considered protective [4, 14] . Protection against clinical disease is mainly conferred by serum antibodies; however, mucosal IgA antibodies also may contribute to resistance against infection. Split virus inactivated vaccines can induce neuraminidase (NA)-specific antibody responses [15] [16] [17] , and anti-NA antibodies have been associated with protection from infection in humans [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] . Currently, NA-specific antibody responses are not considered a correlate of protection [14] . LAIV is administered as a nasal spray and contains the same three or four influenza virus strains as inactivated vaccines but on an attenuated vaccine backbone [4] . LAIV are temperature-sensitive and cold-adapted so they do not replicate effectively at core body temperature, but replicate in the mucosa of the nasopharynx [23] . LAIV immunization induces serum antibody responses, mucosal antibody responses (IgA), and T cell responses. While robust serum antibody and nasal wash (mucosal) antibody responses are associated with protection from infection, other immune responses, such as CD8 + cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) responses may contribute to protection and there is not a clear correlate of immunity for LAIV [4, 14, 24] .
Currently licensed influenza virus vaccines suffer from a number of issues. The inactivated vaccines rely on specific antibody responses to the HA, and to a lesser extent NA proteins for protection. The immunodominant portions of the HA and NA molecules undergo a constant process of antigenic drift, a natural accumulation of mutations, enabling virus evasion from immunity [9, 25] . Thus, the circulating influenza A and B strains are reviewed annually for antigenic match with current vaccines, Replacement of vaccine strains may occur regularly, and annual vaccination is recommended to assure protection [4, 26, 27] . For the northern hemisphere, vaccine strain selection occurs in February and then manufacturers begin production, taking at least six months to produce the millions of vaccine doses required for the fall [27] . If the prediction is imperfect, or if manufacturers have issues with vaccine production, vaccine efficacy or availability can be compromised [28] . LAIV is not recommended for all populations; however, it is generally considered to be as effective as inactivated vaccines and may be more efficacious in children [4, 9, 24] . While LAIV relies on antigenic match and the HA and NA antigens are replaced on the same schedule as the TIV [4, 9] , there is some suggestion that LAIV may induce broader protection than TIV due to the diversity of the immune response consistent with inducing virus-neutralizing serum and mucosal antibodies, as well as broadly reactive T cell responses [9, 23, 29] . While overall both TIV and LAIV are considered safe and effective, there is a recognized need for improved seasonal influenza vaccines [26] . Moreover, improved understanding of immunity to conserved influenza virus antigens has raised the possibility of a universal vaccine, and these universal antigens will likely require novel vaccines for effective delivery [30] [31] [32] .
Virus-vectored vaccines share many of the advantages of LAIV, as well as those unique to the vectors. Recombinant DNA systems exist that allow ready manipulation and modification of the vector genome. This in turn enables modification of the vectors to attenuate the virus or enhance immunogenicity, in addition to adding and manipulating the influenza virus antigens. Many of these vectors have been extensively studied or used as vaccines against wild type forms of the virus. Finally, each of these vaccine vectors is either replication-defective or causes a self-limiting infection, although like LAIV, safety in immunocompromised individuals still remains a concern [4, 13, [33] [34] [35] . Table 1 summarizes the benefits and concerns of each of the virus-vectored vaccines discussed here.
There are 53 serotypes of adenovirus, many of which have been explored as vaccine vectors. A live adenovirus vaccine containing serotypes 4 and 7 has been in use by the military for decades, suggesting adenoviruses may be safe for widespread vaccine use [36] . However, safety concerns have led to the majority of adenovirus-based vaccine development to focus on replication-defective vectors. Adenovirus 5 (Ad5) is the most-studied serotype, having been tested for gene delivery and anti-cancer agents, as well as for infectious disease vaccines.
Adenovirus vectors are attractive as vaccine vectors because their genome is very stable and there are a variety of recombinant systems available which can accommodate up to 10 kb of recombinant genetic material [37] . Adenovirus is a non-enveloped virus which is relatively stable and can be formulated for long-term storage at 4 °C, or even storage up to six months at room temperature [33] . Adenovirus vaccines can be grown to high titers, exceeding 10 1° plaque forming units (PFU) per mL when cultured on 293 or PER.C6 cells [38] , and the virus can be purified by simple methods [39] . Adenovirus vaccines can also be delivered via multiple routes, including intramuscular injection, subcutaneous injection, intradermal injection, oral delivery using a protective capsule, and by intranasal delivery. Importantly, the latter two delivery methods induce robust mucosal immune responses and may bypass preexisting vector immunity [33] . Even replication-defective adenovirus vectors are naturally immunostimulatory and effective adjuvants to the recombinant antigen being delivered. Adenovirus has been extensively studied as a vaccine vector for human disease. The first report using adenovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza demonstrated immunogenicity of recombinant adenovirus 5 (rAd5) expressing the HA of a swine influenza virus, A/Swine/Iowa/1999 (H3N2). Intramuscular immunization of mice with this construct induced robust neutralizing antibody responses and protected mice from challenge with a heterologous virus, A/Hong Kong/1/1968 (H3N2) [40] . Replication defective rAd5 vaccines expressing influenza HA have also been tested in humans. A rAd5-HA expressing the HA from A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1; PR8) was delivered to humans epicutaneously or intranasally and assayed for safety and immunogenicity. The vaccine was well tolerated and induced seroconversion with the intranasal administration had a higher conversion rate and higher geometric meant HI titers [41] . While clinical trials with rAd vectors have overall been successful, demonstrating safety and some level of efficacy, rAd5 as a vector has been negatively overshadowed by two clinical trial failures. The first trial was a gene therapy examination where high-dose intravenous delivery of an Ad vector resulted in the death of an 18-year-old male [42, 43] . The second clinical failure was using an Ad5-vectored HIV vaccine being tested as a part of a Step Study, a phase 2B clinical trial. In this study, individuals were vaccinated with the Ad5 vaccine vector expressing HIV-1 gag, pol, and nef genes. The vaccine induced HIV-specific T cell responses; however, the study was stopped after interim analysis suggested the vaccine did not achieve efficacy and individuals with high preexisting Ad5 antibody titers might have an increased risk of acquiring HIV-1 [44] [45] [46] . Subsequently, the rAd5 vaccine-associated risk was confirmed [47] . While these two instances do not suggest Ad-vector vaccines are unsafe or inefficacious, the umbra cast by the clinical trials notes has affected interest for all adenovirus vaccines, but interest still remains.
Immunization with adenovirus vectors induces potent cellular and humoral immune responses that are initiated through toll-like receptor-dependent and independent pathways which induce robust pro-inflammatory cytokine responses. Recombinant Ad vaccines expressing HA antigens from pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1), H5 and H7 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus (HPAIV), and H9 avian influenza viruses have been tested for efficacy in a number of animal models, including chickens, mice, and ferrets, and been shown to be efficacious and provide protection from challenge [48, 49] . Several rAd5 vectors have been explored for delivery of non-HA antigens, influenza nucleoprotein (NP) and matrix 2 (M2) protein [29, [50] [51] [52] . The efficacy of non-HA antigens has led to their inclusion with HA-based vaccines to improve immunogenicity and broaden breadth of both humoral and cellular immunity [53, 54] . However, as both CD8 + T cell and neutralizing antibody responses are generated by the vector and vaccine antigens, immunological memory to these components can reduce efficacy and limit repeated use [48] .
One drawback of an Ad5 vector is the potential for preexisting immunity, so alternative adenovirus serotypes have been explored as vectors, particularly non-human and uncommon human serotypes. Non-human adenovirus vectors include those from non-human primates (NHP), dogs, sheep, pigs, cows, birds and others [48, 55] . These vectors can infect a variety of cell types, but are generally attenuated in humans avoiding concerns of preexisting immunity. Swine, NHP and bovine adenoviruses expressing H5 HA antigens have been shown to induce immunity comparable to human rAd5-H5 vaccines [33, 56] . Recombinant, replication-defective adenoviruses from low-prevalence serotypes have also been shown to be efficacious. Low prevalence serotypes such as adenovirus types 3, 7, 11, and 35 can evade anti-Ad5 immune responses while maintaining effective antigen delivery and immunogenicity [48, 57] . Prime-boost strategies, using DNA or protein immunization in conjunction with an adenovirus vaccine booster immunization have also been explored as a means to avoided preexisting immunity [52] .
Adeno-associated viruses (AAV) were first explored as gene therapy vectors. Like rAd vectors, rAAV have broad tropism infecting a variety of hosts, tissues, and proliferating and non-proliferating cell types [58] . AAVs had been generally not considered as vaccine vectors because they were widely considered to be poorly immunogenic. A seminal study using AAV-2 to express a HSV-2 glycoprotein showed this virus vaccine vector effectively induced potent CD8 + T cell and serum antibody responses, thereby opening the door to other rAAV vaccine-associated studies [59, 60] .
AAV vector systems have a number of engaging properties. The wild type viruses are non-pathogenic and replication incompetent in humans and the recombinant AAV vector systems are even further attenuated [61] . As members of the parvovirus family, AAVs are small non-enveloped viruses that are stable and amenable to long-term storage without a cold chain. While there is limited preexisting immunity, availability of non-human strains as vaccine candidates eliminates these concerns. Modifications to the vector have increased immunogenicity, as well [60] .
There are limited studies using AAVs as vaccine vectors for influenza. An AAV expressing an HA antigen was first shown to induce protective in 2001 [62] . Later, a hybrid AAV derived from two non-human primate isolates (AAVrh32.33) was used to express influenza NP and protect against PR8 challenge in mice [63] . Most recently, following the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus pandemic, rAAV vectors were generated expressing the HA, NP and matrix 1 (M1) proteins of A/Mexico/4603/2009 (pH1N1), and in murine immunization and challenge studies, the rAAV-HA and rAAV-NP were shown to be protective; however, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + NP + M1 had the most robust protection. Also, mice vaccinated with rAAV-HA + rAAV-NP + rAAV-M1 were also partially protected against heterologous (PR8, H1N1) challenge [63] . Most recently, an AAV vector was used to deliver passive immunity to influenza [64, 65] . In these studies, AAV (AAV8 and AAV9) was used to deliver an antibody transgene encoding a broadly cross-protective anti-influenza monoclonal antibody for in vivo expression. Both intramuscular and intranasal delivery of the AAVs was shown to protect against a number of influenza virus challenges in mice and ferrets, including H1N1 and H5N1 viruses [64, 65] . These studies suggest that rAAV vectors are promising vaccine and immunoprophylaxis vectors. To this point, while approximately 80 phase I, I/II, II, or III rAAV clinical trials are open, completed, or being reviewed, these have focused upon gene transfer studies and so there is as yet limited safety data for use of rAAV as vaccines [66] .
Alphaviruses are positive-sense, single-stranded RNA viruses of the Togaviridae family. A variety of alphaviruses have been developed as vaccine vectors, including Semliki Forest virus (SFV), Sindbis (SIN) virus, Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus, as well as chimeric viruses incorporating portions of SIN and VEE viruses. The replication defective vaccines or replicons do not encode viral structural proteins, having these portions of the genome replaces with transgenic material.
The structural proteins are provided in cell culture production systems. One important feature of the replicon systems is the self-replicating nature of the RNA. Despite the partial viral genome, the RNAs are self-replicating and can express transgenes at very high levels [67] .
SIN, SFV, and VEE have all been tested for efficacy as vaccine vectors for influenza virus [68] [69] [70] [71] . A VEE-based replicon system encoding the HA from PR8 was demonstrated to induce potent HA-specific immune response and protected from challenge in a murine model, despite repeated immunization with the vector expressing a control antigen, suggesting preexisting immunity may not be an issue for the replicon vaccine [68] . A separate study developed a VEE replicon system expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/1997 (H5N1) and demonstrated varying efficacy after in ovo vaccination or vaccination of 1-day-old chicks [70] . A recombinant SIN virus was use as a vaccine vector to deliver a CD8 + T cell epitope only. The well-characterized NP epitope was transgenically expressed in the SIN system and shown to be immunogenic in mice, priming a robust CD8 + T cell response and reducing influenza virus titer after challenge [69] . More recently, a VEE replicon system expressing the HA protein of PR8 was shown to protect young adult (8-week-old) and aged (12-month-old) mice from lethal homologous challenge [72] .
The VEE replicon systems are particularly appealing as the VEE targets antigen-presenting cells in the lymphatic tissues, priming rapid and robust immune responses [73] . VEE replicon systems can induce robust mucosal immune responses through intranasal or subcutaneous immunization [72] [73] [74] , and subcutaneous immunization with virus-like replicon particles (VRP) expressing HA-induced antigen-specific systemic IgG and fecal IgA antibodies [74] . VRPs derived from VEE virus have been developed as candidate vaccines for cytomegalovirus (CMV). A phase I clinical trial with the CMV VRP showed the vaccine was immunogenic, inducing CMV-neutralizing antibody responses and potent T cell responses. Moreover, the vaccine was well tolerated and considered safe [75] . A separate clinical trial assessed efficacy of repeated immunization with a VRP expressing a tumor antigen. The vaccine was safe and despite high vector-specific immunity after initial immunization, continued to boost transgene-specific immune responses upon boost [76] . While additional clinical data is needed, these reports suggest alphavirus replicon systems or VRPs may be safe and efficacious, even in the face of preexisting immunity.
Baculovirus has been extensively used to produce recombinant proteins. Recently, a baculovirus-derived recombinant HA vaccine was approved for human use and was first available for use in the United States for the 2013-2014 influenza season [4] . Baculoviruses have also been explored as vaccine vectors. Baculoviruses have a number of advantages as vaccine vectors. The viruses have been extensively studied for protein expression and for pesticide use and so are readily manipulated. The vectors can accommodate large gene insertions, show limited cytopathic effect in mammalian cells, and have been shown to infect and express genes of interest in a spectrum of mammalian cells [77] . While the insect promoters are not effective for mammalian gene expression, appropriate promoters can be cloned into the baculovirus vaccine vectors.
Baculovirus vectors have been tested as influenza vaccines, with the first reported vaccine using Autographa californica nuclear polyhedrosis virus (AcNPV) expressing the HA of PR8 under control of the CAG promoter (AcCAG-HA) [77] . Intramuscular, intranasal, intradermal, and intraperitoneal immunization or mice with AcCAG-HA elicited HA-specific antibody responses, however only intranasal immunization provided protection from lethal challenge. Interestingly, intranasal immunization with the wild type AcNPV also resulted in protection from PR8 challenge. The robust innate immune response to the baculovirus provided non-specific protection from subsequent influenza virus infection [78] . While these studies did not demonstrate specific protection, there were antigen-specific immune responses and potential adjuvant effects by the innate response.
Baculovirus pseudotype viruses have also been explored. The G protein of vesicular stomatitis virus controlled by the insect polyhedron promoter and the HA of A/Chicken/Hubei/327/2004 (H5N1) HPAIV controlled by a CMV promoter were used to generate the BV-G-HA. Intramuscular immunization of mice or chickens with BV-G-HA elicited strong HI and VN serum antibody responses, IFN-γ responses, and protected from H5N1 challenge [79] . A separate study demonstrated efficacy using a bivalent pseudotyped baculovirus vector [80] .
Baculovirus has also been used to generate an inactivated particle vaccine. The HA of A/Indonesia/CDC669/2006(H5N1) was incorporated into a commercial baculovirus vector controlled by the e1 promoter from White Spot Syndrome Virus. The resulting recombinant virus was propagated in insect (Sf9) cells and inactivated as a particle vaccine [81, 82] . Intranasal delivery with cholera toxin B as an adjuvant elicited robust HI titers and protected from lethal challenge [81] . Oral delivery of this encapsulated vaccine induced robust serum HI titers and mucosal IgA titers in mice, and protected from H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, co-formulations of inactivated baculovirus vectors have also been shown to be effective in mice [83] .
While there is growing data on the potential use of baculovirus or pseudotyped baculovirus as a vaccine vector, efficacy data in mammalian animal models other than mice is lacking. There is also no data on the safety in humans, reducing enthusiasm for baculovirus as a vaccine vector for influenza at this time.
Newcastle disease virus (NDV) is a single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that causes disease in poultry. NDV has a number of appealing qualities as a vaccine vector. As an avian virus, there is little or no preexisting immunity to NDV in humans and NDV propagates to high titers in both chicken eggs and cell culture. As a paramyxovirus, there is no DNA phase in the virus lifecycle reducing concerns of integration events, and the levels of gene expression are driven by the proximity to the leader sequence at the 3' end of the viral genome. This gradient of gene expression enables attenuation through rearrangement of the genome, or by insertion of transgenes within the genome. Finally, pathogenicity of NDV is largely determined by features of the fusion protein enabling ready attenuation of the vaccine vector [84] .
Reverse genetics, a method that allows NDV to be rescued from plasmids expressing the viral RNA polymerase and nucleocapsid proteins, was first reported in 1999 [85, 86] . This process has enabled manipulation of the NDV genome as well as incorporation of transgenes and the development of NDV vectors. Influenza was the first infectious disease targeted with a recombinant NDV (rNDV) vector. The HA protein of A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was inserted into the Hitchner B1 vaccine strain. The HA protein was expressed on infected cells and was incorporated into infectious virions. While the virus was attenuated compared to the parental vaccine strain, it induced a robust serum antibody response and protected against homologous influenza virus challenge in a murine model of infection [87] . Subsequently, rNDV was tested as a vaccine vector for HPAIV having varying efficacy against H5 and H7 influenza virus infections in poultry [88] [89] [90] [91] [92] [93] [94] . These vaccines have the added benefit of potentially providing protection against both the influenza virus and NDV infection.
NDV has also been explored as a vaccine vector for humans. Two NHP studies assessed the immunogenicity and efficacy of an rNDV expressing the HA or NA of A/Vietnam/1203/2004 (H5N1; VN1203) [95, 96] . Intranasal and intratracheal delivery of the rNDV-HA or rNDV-NA vaccines induced both serum and mucosal antibody responses and protected from HPAIV challenge [95, 96] . NDV has limited clinical data; however, phase I and phase I/II clinical trials have shown that the NDV vector is well-tolerated, even at high doses delivered intravenously [44, 97] . While these results are promising, additional studies are needed to advance NDV as a human vaccine vector for influenza.
Parainfluenza virus type 5 (PIV5) is a paramyxovirus vaccine vector being explored for delivery of influenza and other infectious disease vaccine antigens. PIV5 has only recently been described as a vaccine vector [98] . Similar to other RNA viruses, PIV5 has a number of features that make it an attractive vaccine vector. For example, PIV5 has a stable RNA genome and no DNA phase in virus replication cycle reducing concerns of host genome integration or modification. PIV5 can be grown to very high titers in mammalian vaccine cell culture substrates and is not cytopathic allowing for extended culture and harvest of vaccine virus [98, 99] . Like NDV, PIV5 has a 3'-to 5' gradient of gene expression and insertion of transgenes at different locations in the genome can variably attenuate the virus and alter transgene expression [100] . PIV5 has broad tropism, infecting many cell types, tissues, and species without causing clinical disease, although PIV5 has been associated with -kennel cough‖ in dogs [99] . A reverse genetics system for PIV5 was first used to insert the HA gene from A/Udorn/307/72 (H3N2) into the PIV5 genome between the hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) gene and the large (L) polymerase gene. Similar to NDV, the HA was expressed at high levels in infected cells and replicated similarly to the wild type virus, and importantly, was not pathogenic in immunodeficient mice [98] . Additionally, a single intranasal immunization in a murine model of influenza infection was shown to induce neutralizing antibody responses and protect against a virus expressing homologous HA protein [98] . PIV5 has also been explored as a vaccine against HPAIV. Recombinant PIV5 vaccines expressing the HA or NP from VN1203 were tested for efficacy in a murine challenge model. Mice intranasally vaccinated with a single dose of PIV5-H5 vaccine had robust serum and mucosal antibody responses, and were protected from lethal challenge. Notably, although cellular immune responses appeared to contribute to protection, serum antibody was sufficient for protection from challenge [100, 101] . Intramuscular immunization with PIV5-H5 was also shown to be effective at inducing neutralizing antibody responses and protecting against lethal influenza virus challenge [101] . PIV5 expressing the NP protein of HPAIV was also efficacious in the murine immunization and challenge model, where a single intranasal immunization induced robust CD8 + T cell responses and protected against homologous (H5N1) and heterosubtypic (H1N1) virus challenge [102] .
Currently there is no clinical safety data for use of PIV5 in humans. However, live PIV5 has been a component of veterinary vaccines for -kennel cough‖ for >30 years, and veterinarians and dog owners are exposed to live PIV5 without reported disease [99] . This combined with preclinical data from a variety of animal models suggests that PIV5 as a vector is likely to be safe in humans. As preexisting immunity is a concern for all virus-vectored vaccines, it should be noted that there is no data on the levels of preexisting immunity to PIV5 in humans. However, a study evaluating the efficacy of a PIV5-H3 vaccine in canines previously vaccinated against PIV5 (kennel cough) showed induction of robust anti-H3 serum antibody responses as well as high serum antibody levels to the PIV5 vaccine, suggesting preexisting immunity to the PIV5 vector may not affect immunogenicity of vaccines even with repeated use [99] .
Poxvirus vaccines have a long history and the notable hallmark of being responsible for eradication of smallpox. The termination of the smallpox virus vaccination program has resulted in a large population of poxvirus-naï ve individuals that provides the opportunity for the use of poxviruses as vectors without preexisting immunity concerns [103] . Poxvirus-vectored vaccines were first proposed for use in 1982 with two reports of recombinant vaccinia viruses encoding and expressing functional thymidine kinase gene from herpes virus [104, 105] . Within a year, a vaccinia virus encoding the HA of an H2N2 virus was shown to express a functional HA protein (cleaved in the HA1 and HA2 subunits) and be immunogenic in rabbits and hamsters [106] . Subsequently, all ten of the primary influenza proteins have been expressed in vaccine virus [107] .
Early work with intact vaccinia virus vectors raised safety concerns, as there was substantial reactogenicity that hindered recombinant vaccine development [108] . Two vaccinia vectors were developed to address these safety concerns. The modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) strain was attenuated by passage 530 times in chick embryo fibroblasts cultures. The second, New York vaccinia virus (NYVAC) was a plaque-purified clone of the Copenhagen vaccine strain rationally attenuated by deletion of 18 open reading frames [109] [110] [111] .
Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) was developed prior to smallpox eradication to reduce or prevent adverse effects of other smallpox vaccines [109] . Serial tissue culture passage of MVA resulted in loss of 15% of the genome, and established a growth restriction for avian cells. The defects affected late stages in virus assembly in non-avian cells, a feature enabling use of the vector as single-round expression vector in non-permissive hosts. Interestingly, over two decades ago, recombinant MVA expressing the HA and NP of influenza virus was shown to be effective against lethal influenza virus challenge in a murine model [112] . Subsequently, MVA expressing various antigens from seasonal, pandemic (A/California/04/2009, pH1N1), equine (A/Equine/Kentucky/1/81 H3N8), and HPAI (VN1203) viruses have been shown to be efficacious in murine, ferret, NHP, and equine challenge models [113] . MVA vaccines are very effective stimulators of both cellular and humoral immunity. For example, abortive infection provides native expression of the influenza antigens enabling robust antibody responses to native surface viral antigens. Concurrently, the intracellular influenza peptides expressed by the pox vector enter the class I MHC antigen processing and presentation pathway enabling induction of CD8 + T cell antiviral responses. MVA also induces CD4 + T cell responses further contributing to the magnitude of the antigen-specific effector functions [107, [112] [113] [114] [115] . MVA is also a potent activator of early innate immune responses further enhancing adaptive immune responses [116] . Between early smallpox vaccine development and more recent vaccine vector development, MVA has undergone extensive safety testing and shown to be attenuated in severely immunocompromised animals and safe for use in children, adults, elderly, and immunocompromised persons. With extensive pre-clinical data, recombinant MVA vaccines expressing influenza antigens have been tested in clinical trials and been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans [117] [118] [119] . These results combined with data from other (non-influenza) clinical and pre-clinical studies support MVA as a leading viral-vectored candidate vaccine.
The NYVAC vector is a highly attenuated vaccinia virus strain. NYVAC is replication-restricted; however, it grows in chick embryo fibroblasts and Vero cells enabling vaccine-scale production. In non-permissive cells, critical late structural proteins are not produced stopping replication at the immature virion stage [120] . NYVAC is very attenuated and considered safe for use in humans of all ages; however, it predominantly induces a CD4 + T cell response which is different compared to MVA [114] . Both MVA and NYVAC provoke robust humoral responses, and can be delivered mucosally to induce mucosal antibody responses [121] . There has been only limited exploration of NYVAC as a vaccine vector for influenza virus; however, a vaccine expressing the HA from A/chicken/Indonesia/7/2003 (H5N1) was shown to induce potent neutralizing antibody responses and protect against challenge in swine [122] .
While there is strong safety and efficacy data for use of NYVAC or MVA-vectored influenza vaccines, preexisting immunity remains a concern. Although the smallpox vaccination campaign has resulted in a population of poxvirus-naï ve people, the initiation of an MVA or NYVAC vaccination program for HIV, influenza or other pathogens will rapidly reduce this susceptible population. While there is significant interest in development of pox-vectored influenza virus vaccines, current influenza vaccination strategies rely upon regular immunization with vaccines matched to circulating strains. This would likely limit the use and/or efficacy of poxvirus-vectored influenza virus vaccines for regular and seasonal use [13] . Intriguingly, NYVAC may have an advantage for use as an influenza vaccine vector, because immunization with this vector induces weaker vaccine-specific immune responses compared to other poxvirus vaccines, a feature that may address the concerns surrounding preexisting immunity [123] .
While poxvirus-vectored vaccines have not yet been approved for use in humans, there is a growing list of licensed poxvirus for veterinary use that include fowlpox-and canarypox-vectored vaccines for avian and equine influenza viruses, respectively [124, 125] . The fowlpox-vectored vaccine expressing the avian influenza virus HA antigen has the added benefit of providing protection against fowlpox infection. Currently, at least ten poxvirus-vectored vaccines have been licensed for veterinary use [126] . These poxvirus vectors have the potential for use as vaccine vectors in humans, similar to the first use of cowpox for vaccination against smallpox [127] . The availability of these non-human poxvirus vectors with extensive animal safety and efficacy data may address the issues with preexisting immunity to the human vaccine strains, although the cross-reactivity originally described with cowpox could also limit use.
Influenza vaccines utilizing vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), a rhabdovirus, as a vaccine vector have a number of advantages shared with other RNA virus vaccine vectors. Both live and replication-defective VSV vaccine vectors have been shown to be immunogenic [128, 129] , and like Paramyxoviridae, the Rhabdoviridae genome has a 3'-to-5' gradient of gene expression enabling attention by selective vaccine gene insertion or genome rearrangement [130] . VSV has a number of other advantages including broad tissue tropism, and the potential for intramuscular or intranasal immunization. The latter delivery method enables induction of mucosal immunity and elimination of needles required for vaccination. Also, there is little evidence of VSV seropositivity in humans eliminating concerns of preexisting immunity, although repeated use may be a concern. Also, VSV vaccine can be produced using existing mammalian vaccine manufacturing cell lines.
Influenza antigens were first expressed in a VSV vector in 1997. Both the HA and NA were shown to be expressed as functional proteins and incorporated into the recombinant VSV particles [131] . Subsequently, VSV-HA, expressing the HA protein from A/WSN/1933 (H1N1) was shown to be immunogenic and protect mice from lethal influenza virus challenge [129] . To reduce safety concerns, attenuated VSV vectors were developed. One candidate vaccine had a truncated VSV G protein, while a second candidate was deficient in G protein expression and relied on G protein expressed by a helper vaccine cell line to the provide the virus receptor. Both vectors were found to be attenuated in mice, but maintained immunogenicity [128] . More recently, single-cycle replicating VSV vaccines have been tested for efficacy against H5N1 HPAIV. VSV vectors expressing the HA from A/Hong Kong/156/97 (H5N1) were shown to be immunogenic and induce cross-reactive antibody responses and protect against challenge with heterologous H5N1 challenge in murine and NHP models [132] [133] [134] .
VSV vectors are not without potential concerns. VSV can cause disease in a number of species, including humans [135] . The virus is also potentially neuroinvasive in some species [136] , although NHP studies suggest this is not a concern in humans [137] . Also, while the incorporation of the influenza antigen in to the virion may provide some benefit in immunogenicity, changes in tropism or attenuation could arise from incorporation of different influenza glycoproteins. There is no evidence for this, however [134] . Currently, there is no human safety data for VSV-vectored vaccines. While experimental data is promising, additional work is needed before consideration for human influenza vaccination.
Current influenza vaccines rely on matching the HA antigen of the vaccine with circulating strains to provide strain-specific neutralizing antibody responses [4, 14, 24] . There is significant interest in developing universal influenza vaccines that would not require annual reformulation to provide protective robust and durable immunity. These vaccines rely on generating focused immune responses to highly conserved portions of the virus that are refractory to mutation [30] [31] [32] . Traditional vaccines may not be suitable for these vaccination strategies; however, vectored vaccines that have the ability to be readily modified and to express transgenes are compatible for these applications.
The NP and M2 proteins have been explored as universal vaccine antigens for decades. Early work with recombinant viral vectors demonstrated that immunization with vaccines expressing influenza antigens induced potent CD8 + T cell responses [107, [138] [139] [140] [141] . These responses, even to the HA antigen, could be cross-protective [138] . A number of studies have shown that immunization with NP expressed by AAV, rAd5, alphavirus vectors, MVA, or other vector systems induces potent CD8 + T cell responses and protects against influenza virus challenge [52, 63, 69, 102, 139, 142] . As the NP protein is highly conserved across influenza A viruses, NP-specific T cells can protect against heterologous and even heterosubtypic virus challenges [30] .
The M2 protein is also highly conserved and expressed on the surface of infected cells, although to a lesser extent on the surface of virus particles [30] . Much of the vaccine work in this area has focused on virus-like or subunit particles expressing the M2 ectodomain; however, studies utilizing a DNA-prime, rAd-boost strategies to vaccinate against the entire M2 protein have shown the antigen to be immunogenic and protective [50] . In these studies, antibodies to the M2 protein protected against homologous and heterosubtypic challenge, including a H5N1 HPAIV challenge. More recently, NP and M2 have been combined to induce broadly cross-reactive CD8 + T cell and antibody responses, and rAd5 vaccines expressing these antigens have been shown to protect against pH1N1 and H5N1 challenges [29, 51] .
Historically, the HA has not been widely considered as a universal vaccine antigen. However, the recent identification of virus neutralizing monoclonal antibodies that cross-react with many subtypes of influenza virus [143] has presented the opportunity to design vaccine antigens to prime focused antibody responses to the highly conserved regions recognized by these monoclonal antibodies. The majority of these broadly cross-reactive antibodies recognize regions on the stalk of the HA protein [143] . The HA stalk is generally less immunogenic compared to the globular head of the HA protein so most approaches have utilized -headless‖ HA proteins as immunogens. HA stalk vaccines have been designed using DNA and virus-like particles [144] and MVA [142] ; however, these approaches are amenable to expression in any of the viruses vectors described here.
The goal of any vaccine is to protect against infection and disease, while inducing population-based immunity to reduce or eliminate virus transmission within the population. It is clear that currently licensed influenza vaccines have not fully met these goals, nor those specific to inducing long-term, robust immunity. There are a number of vaccine-related issues that must be addressed before population-based influenza vaccination strategies are optimized. The concept of a -one size fits all‖ vaccine needs to be updated, given the recent ability to probe the virus-host interface through RNA interference approaches that facilitate the identification of host genes affecting virus replication, immunity, and disease. There is also a need for revision of the current influenza virus vaccine strategies for at-risk populations, particularly those at either end of the age spectrum. An example of an improved vaccine regime might include the use of a vectored influenza virus vaccine that expresses the HA, NA and M and/or NP proteins for the two currently circulating influenza A subtypes and both influenza B strains so that vaccine take and vaccine antigen levels are not an issue in inducing protective immunity. Recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient influenza viruses may offer an advantage for this and other approaches.
Vectored vaccines can be constructed to express full-length influenza virus proteins, as well as generate conformationally restricted epitopes, features critical in generating appropriate humoral protection. Inclusion of internal influenza antigens in a vectored vaccine can also induce high levels of protective cellular immunity. To generate sustained immunity, it is an advantage to induce immunity at sites of inductive immunity to natural infection, in this case the respiratory tract. Several vectored vaccines target the respiratory tract. Typically, vectored vaccines generate antigen for weeks after immunization, in contrast to subunit vaccination. This increased presence and level of vaccine antigen contributes to and helps sustain a durable memory immune response, even augmenting the selection of higher affinity antibody secreting cells. The enhanced memory response is in part linked to the intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. Thus, for weaker antigens typical of HA, vectored vaccines have the capacity to overcome real limitations in achieving robust and durable protection.
Meeting the mandates of seasonal influenza vaccine development is difficult, and to respond to a pandemic strain is even more challenging. Issues with influenza vaccine strain selection based on recently circulating viruses often reflect recommendations by the World Health Organization (WHO)-a process that is cumbersome. The strains of influenza A viruses to be used in vaccine manufacture are not wild-type viruses but rather reassortants that are hybrid viruses containing at least the HA and NA gene segments from the target strains and other gene segments from the master strain, PR8, which has properties of high growth in fertilized hen's eggs. This additional process requires more time and quality control, and specifically for HPAI viruses, it is a process that may fail because of the nature of those viruses. In contrast, viral-vectored vaccines are relatively easy to manipulate and produce, and have well-established safety profiles. There are several viral-based vectors currently employed as antigen delivery systems, including poxviruses, adenoviruses baculovirus, paramyxovirus, rhabdovirus, and others; however, the majority of human clinical trials assessing viral-vectored influenza vaccines use poxvirus and adenovirus vectors. While each of these vector approaches has unique features and is in different stages of development, the combined successes of these approaches supports the virus-vectored vaccine approach as a whole. Issues such as preexisting immunity and cold chain requirements, and lingering safety concerns will have to be overcome; however, each approach is making progress in addressing these issues, and all of the approaches are still viable. Virus-vectored vaccines hold particular promise for vaccination with universal or focused antigens where traditional vaccination methods are not suited to efficacious delivery of these antigens. The most promising approaches currently in development are arguably those targeting conserved HA stalk region epitopes. Given the findings to date, virus-vectored vaccines hold great promise and may overcome the current limitations of influenza vaccines. | What is the enhanced memory immune response linked to? | 1,656 | intrinsic augmentation of immunity induced by the vector. | 43,357 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | What cellular process is the Tat protein essential to? | 5,128 | HIV-1 replication | 479 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | Where does the Tat protein move to in cells? | 5,129 | nucleoplasm and the nucleolus | 519 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | What is a nucleolus? | 5,130 | a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment | 565 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | Where are rRNA and ribosomes created? | 5,131 | nucleolus | 554 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | How many proteins were shown to change the amount of Jurkat T-cell nucleolus significantly? | 5,132 | 49 | 1,433 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | What cellular processes occur in the nucleolus? | 5,133 | RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly | 2,985 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | Which viruses target the nucleolus as part of their replication strategy? | 5,134 | HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV | 4,678 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | What nucleolar antigen is essential of localization of Tat and Rev proteins? | 5,135 | B23 | 5,436 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | What was studied in this report? | 5,136 | systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells | 6,845 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | What was studied in this report? | 5,137 | the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, | 7,434 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | Which isotope labeled arginine? | 5,138 | light (R0K0) | 9,657 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | Which isotope labeled lysine? | 5,139 | heavy (R6K6) | 9,674 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | How many cells were harvested from each culture? | 5,140 | 85 million | 9,799 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | How long is the nuclear protein PARP-1? | 5,141 | 113 kDa | 10,640 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | How long is the protein Alpha-tubulin? | 5,142 | 50 kDa | 10,762 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | Where was alpha-tubulin found most abundantly in the cell? | 5,143 | cytoplasmic | 10,797 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | Where was alpha-tubulin found least abundantly in the cell? | 5,144 | nuclear | 10,845 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | What is shown in Table S1? | 5,145 | The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins | 11,360 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | What types of cells are used to study Tat-mediated pathogenesis? | 5,146 | Jurkat T-cells | 32,303 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | How many proteins displayed a significant fold change? | 5,147 | 49 | 34,212 |
1,686 | Nucleolar Protein Trafficking in Response to HIV-1 Tat: Rewiring the Nucleolus
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3499507/
SHA: efa871aeaf22cbd0ce30e8bd1cb3d1afff2a98f9
Authors: Jarboui, Mohamed Ali; Bidoia, Carlo; Woods, Elena; Roe, Barbara; Wynne, Kieran; Elia, Giuliano; Hall, William W.; Gautier, Virginie W.
Date: 2012-11-15
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048702
License: cc-by
Abstract: The trans-activator Tat protein is a viral regulatory protein essential for HIV-1 replication. Tat trafficks to the nucleoplasm and the nucleolus. The nucleolus, a highly dynamic and structured membrane-less sub-nuclear compartment, is the site of rRNA and ribosome biogenesis and is involved in numerous cellular functions including transcriptional regulation, cell cycle control and viral infection. Importantly, transient nucleolar trafficking of both Tat and HIV-1 viral transcripts are critical in HIV-1 replication, however, the role(s) of the nucleolus in HIV-1 replication remains unclear. To better understand how the interaction of Tat with the nucleolar machinery contributes to HIV-1 pathogenesis, we investigated the quantitative changes in the composition of the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T-cells stably expressing HIV-1 Tat fused to a TAP tag. Using an organellar proteomic approach based on mass spectrometry, coupled with Stable Isotope Labelling in Cell culture (SILAC), we quantified 520 proteins, including 49 proteins showing significant changes in abundance in Jurkat T-cell nucleolus upon Tat expression. Numerous proteins exhibiting a fold change were well characterised Tat interactors and/or known to be critical for HIV-1 replication. This suggests that the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors by Tat provide an additional layer of control for regulating cellular machinery involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis. Pathway analysis and network reconstruction revealed that Tat expression specifically resulted in the nucleolar enrichment of proteins collectively participating in ribosomal biogenesis, protein homeostasis, metabolic pathways including glycolytic, pentose phosphate, nucleotides and amino acids biosynthetic pathways, stress response, T-cell signaling pathways and genome integrity. We present here the first differential profiling of the nucleolar proteome of T-cells expressing HIV-1 Tat. We discuss how these proteins collectively participate in interconnected networks converging to adapt the nucleolus dynamic activities, which favor host biosynthetic activities and may contribute to create a cellular environment supporting robust HIV-1 production.
Text: The nucleolus is a highly ordered subnuclear compartment organised around genetic loci called nucleolar-organising regions (NORs) formed by clusters of hundreds of rDNA gene repeats organised in tandem head-to-tail repeat [1, 2] . A membrane-less organelle originally described as the ''Ribosome Factory'', the nucleolus is dedicated to RNA-polymerase-I-directed rDNA transcription, rRNA processing mediated by small nucleolar ribonucleoproteins (soRNPs) and ribosome assembly. Ribosome biogenesis is essential for protein synthesis and cell viability [2] and ultimately results in the separate large (60S) and small (40S) ribosomal subunits, which are subsequently exported to the cytoplasm. This fundamental cellular process, to which the cell dedicates most of its energy resources, is tightly regulated to match dynamic changes in cell proliferation, growth rate and metabolic activities [3] .
The nucleolus is the site of additional RNA processing, including mRNA export and degradation, the maturation of uridine-rich small nuclear RNPs (U snRNPs), which form the core of the spliceosome, biogenesis of t-RNA and microRNAs (miRNAs) [4] . The nucleolus is also involved in other cellular processes including cell cycle control, oncogenic processes, cellular stress responses and translation [4] .
The concept of a multifunctional and highly dynamic nucleolus has been substantiated by several studies combining organellar proteomic approaches and quantitative mass spectrometry, and describing thousands of proteins transiting through the nucleolus in response to various metabolic conditions, stress and cellular environments [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16] . Collectively, the aforementioned studies represent landmarks in understanding the functional complexity of the nucleolus, and demonstrated that nucleolar proteins are in continuous exchange with other nuclear and cellular compartments in response to specific cellular conditions.
Of importance, the nucleolus is also the target of viruses including HIV-1, hCMV, HSV and KSHV, as part of their replication strategy [2, 17] . Proteomics studies analysing the nucleoli of cells infected with Human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV), influenza A virus, avian coronavirus infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) or adenovirus highlighted how viruses can distinctively disrupt the distribution of nucleolar proteins [2, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24] . Interestingly, both HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat and Rev localise to the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Both their sequences encompass a nucleolar localisation signal (NoLS) overlapping with their nuclear localisation signal (NLS), which governs their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31] . Furthermore, Tat and Rev interact with the nucleolar antigen B23, which is essential for their nucleolar localisation [25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30] . Nevertheless, a recent study described that in contrast to Jurkat T-cells and other transformed cell lines where Tat is associated with the nucleus and nucleolus, in primary T-cells Tat primarily accumulates at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . While the regulation of their active nuclear import and/or export, as mediated by the karyopherin/importin family have been well described, the mechanisms distributing Tat and Rev between the cytoplasm, nucleoplasm and the nucleolus remains elusive [33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48] . Importantly, two major studies by Machienzi et al. have revealed important functional links between HIV-1 replication and the nucleolus [49, 50] . First, they could inhibit HIV-1 replication and Tat transactivation function employing a TAR decoy specifically directed to the nucleolus. Furthermore, using a similar approach, with an anti-HIV-1 hammerhead ribozyme fused to the U16 small nucleolar RNA and therefore targeted to the nucleolus, they could dramatically suppress HIV-1 replication. Collectively, these findings strongly suggest that HIV-1 transcripts and Tat nucleolar trafficking are critical for HIV-1 replication. However the nature of these contributions remains to be elucidated.
In this report, we systematically analysed the nucleolar proteome perturbations occurring in Jurkat T-cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat, using a quantitative mass spectrometry approach. Following the detailed annotation of the quantitative abundance changes in the nucleolar protein composition upon Tat expression, we focussed on the Tat-affected cellular complexes and signalling pathways associated with ribosome biogenesis, spliceosome, molecular chaperones, DNA replication and repair and metabolism and discuss their potential involvement in HIV-1 pathogenesis.
In this study, we investigated the quantitative changes in the nucleolar proteome of Jurkat T cells constitutively expressing HIV-1 Tat (86aa) versus their Tat-negative counterpart, using stable isotope labelling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC) technology, followed by ESI tandem mass spectrometry and implemented the experimental approach described in Figure 1A . First, using retroviral gene delivery, we transduced HIV-1 Tat fused to a tandem affinity purification (TAP) tag (consisting of two protein G and a streptavidin binding peptide) or TAP tag alone (control vector) in Jurkat leukemia T cell clone E6-1 and sorted the transduced cells (GFP positive) by FACS. This resulted in a highly enriched population of polyclonal transduced cells presenting different expression levels of the transgene ( Figure 1B) . The functionality of TAP-Tat was confirmed by transfecting Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells with a luciferase reporter gene vector under the control of the HIV-1 LTR (pGL3-LTR) [36] . TAP-Tat up regulated gene expression from the HIV-1 LTR by up to 28 fold compared to control ( Figure 1C ). To further address the functionality of Tat fused to TAP, we compared Jurkat TAP-Tat with Jurkat-tat, a cell line stably expressing untagged Tat [51] . Both cell line exhibited comparable HIV-1 LTR activity following transfection with pGL3-LTR ( Figure S1 ). Next, Tat expression and subcellular localization was verified by subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis ( Figure 1E ). TAP-Tat displayed a prominent nuclear/nucleolar localization but could also be detected in the cytoplasm. These observations were further validated by immunofluorescence microscopy ( Figure 1E ). Of note, Jurkat-tat presented similar patterns for Tat subcellular distribution as shown by immunofluorescence microscopy and subcellular fractionation followed by WB analysis (Figure S2 and S3). We next compared the growth rate and proliferation of the Jurkat TAP and TAP-Tat cell lines (Materials and Methods S1), which were equivalent ( Figure S4A ). Similarly, FACS analysis confirmed that the relative populations in G1, S, and G2/M were similar for Jurkat TAP-Tat and TAP cells ( Figure S4B ).
We labeled Jurkat TAP-Tat and Jurkat TAP cells with light (R0K0) and heavy (R6K6) isotope containing arginine and lysine, respectively. Following five passages in their respective SILAC medium, 85 million cells from each culture were harvested, pooled and their nucleoli were isolated as previously described ( Figure 1A ) [52] . Each step of the procedure was closely monitored by microscopic examination. To assess the quality of our fractionation procedure, specific enrichment of known nucleolar antigens was investigated by Western Blot analysis ( Figure 1D ). Nucleolin (110 kDa) and Fibrillarin (FBL) (34 kDa), two major nucleolar proteins known to localise to the granular component of the nucleolus, were found to be highly enriched in the mixed nucleolar fraction. Of note, nucleolin was equally distributed between the nuclear and cytoplasmic fractions. This distribution pattern for nucleolin appears to be specific for Jurkat T-cells as show previously [52, 53] . The nuclear protein PARP-1 (Poly ADPribose polymerase 1) (113 kDa) was present in the nuclear and nucleoplasmic fraction but was depleted in the nucleolar fraction. Alpha-tubulin (50 kDa) was highly abundant in the cytoplasmic fraction and weakly detected in the nuclear fractions. Collectively, these results confirmed that our methods produced a highly enriched nucleolar fraction without significant cross contamination.
Subsequently, the nucleolar protein mixture was trypsindigested and the resulting peptides were analysed by mass spectrometry. Comparative quantitative proteomic analysis was performed using MaxQuant to analyse the ratios in isotopes for each peptide identified. A total of 2427 peptides were quantified, representing 520 quantified nucleolar proteins. The fully annotated list of the quantified nucleolar proteins is available in Table S1 and the raw data from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited in the Tranche repository database (https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/), which can be accessed using the hash keys described in materials and methods. We annotated the quantified proteins using the ToppGene Suite tools [54] and extracted Gene Ontology (GO) and InterPro annotations [55] . The analysis of GO biological processes ( Figure 1F ) revealed that the best-represented biological processes included transcription (24%), RNA processing (23%), cell cycle process (13%) and chromosome organisation (15%), which reflects nucleolar associated functions and is comparable to our previous characterisation of Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Subcellular distribution analysis ( Figure 1F ) revealed that our dataset contained proteins known to localise in the nucleolus (49%), in the nucleus (24%) while 15% of proteins were previously described to reside exclusively in the cytoplasm. The subcellular distribution was similar to our previous analysis of the Jurkat T-cell nucleolar proteome [52] . Table S1 . The distribution of protein ratios are represented in Figure 1G as log 2 (abundance change). The SILAC ratios indicate changes in protein abundance in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells in comparison with Jurkat TAP cells. The distribution of the quantified proteins followed a Gaussian distribution ( Figure 1G ). A total of 49 nucleolar proteins exhibited a 1.5 fold or greater significant change (p,0.05) upon Tat expression (Table 1) . Of these, 30 proteins were enriched, whereas 19 proteins were depleted. Cells displayed no changes in the steady state content of some of the major and abundant constituents of the nucleolus, including nucleophosmin (NPM1/ B23), C23, FBL, nucleolar protein P120 (NOL1), and nucleolar protein 5A (NOL5A). The distinct ratios of protein changes upon Tat expression could reflect specific nucleolar reorganization and altered activities of the nucleolus.
We performed WB analysis to validate the SILAC-based results obtained by our quantitative proteomic approach ( Figure 2 ). 15 selected proteins displayed differential intensity in the nucleolar fractions upon Tat expression, including 9 enriched (HSP90b, STAT3, pRb, CK2a, CK2a', HSP90a, Transportin, ZAP70, DDX3), and 3 depleted (ILF3, BOP1, and SSRP1) proteins. In addition, we also tested by WB analysis, protein abundance not affected by Tat expression (Importin beta, FBL, B23, C23). These results highlight the concordance in the trend of the corresponding SILAC ratios, despite some differences in the quantitative ranges. Of note, using WB, we could observe a change of intensity for protein with a SILAC fold change as low as 1.25-fold.
Of note, the question remains as to which fold change magnitude might constitute a biologically relevant consequence. On the one hand, the threshold of protein abundance changes can be determined statistically and would then highlight the larger abundance changes as illustrated in Table 1 . Alternatively, the coordinated enrichment or depletion of a majority of proteins belonging to a distinct cellular complex or pathway would allow the definition of a group of proteins of interest and potential significance. Therefore, we next focused on both enriched or depleted individual proteins with activities associated with HIV-1 or Tat molecular pathogenesis, and on clustered modifications affecting entire cellular signaling pathways and macromolecular complexes.
We initially focused on signaling proteins interacting with Tat and/or associated HIV-1 molecular pathogenesis and whose abundance in the nucleolus was modulated by Tat expression.
Phospho-protein phosphatases. Phospho-protein phosphatase PP1 and PP2A are essential serine/threonine phosphatases [56, 57] . Importantly, PP1 accounts for 80% of the Ser/Thr phosphatase activity within the nucleolus. In our study, PP1 was found to be potentially enriched by 1.52-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat, which supports previous studies describing the nuclear and nucleolar targeting of PP1a by HIV-1 Tat and how PP1 upregulates HIV-1 transcription [58, 59, 60, 61, 62] . PP1 c was also identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome [63] . Similarly, PPP2CA, the PP2A catalytic subunit (1.29-fold) and its regulatory subunit PP2R1A (1.27-fold) were similarly enriched upon Tat expression. Interestingly, Tat association with the PP2A subunit promoters results in the overexpression and up regulation of PP2A activity in lymphocytes [64, 65] . Furthermore, PP2A contributes to the regulation of HIV-1 transcription and replication [61, 66] .
Retinoblastoma Protein. The tumour suppressor gene pRb protein displayed a 1.4-fold change in the nucleolus upon Tat expression [67] . Furthermore, WB analysis confirmed the distinct translocation of pRb from the nucleoplasm to the nucleolus by Tat ( Figure 2 ). Depending on the cell type, pRb can be hyperphosphorylated or hypophosphorylated upon Tat expression and can negatively or positively regulate Tat-mediated transcription respectively [68, 69, 70] . Interestingly, the hyperphosphorylation of pRB triggers in its translocation into the nucleolus [71] . Phosphorylation of pRB is also associated with an increase in ribosomal biogenesis and cell growth [72] .
STAT3. The transcription factor signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) was significantly enriched (1.86-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat constitutive expression. Furthermore, WB analysis indicated that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of STAT3 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2) . Interestingly, previous studies have demonstrated Tat-mediated activation of STAT3 signaling, as shown by its phosphorylation status [73] . Interestingly, STAT3 phosphorylation induced dimerisation of the protein followed its translocation to the nucleus [74] .
YBX1. YBX1, the DNA/RNA binding multifunctional protein was enriched by 1.38-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells upon Tat expression. Interestingly, YBX1 interacts with Tat and TAR and modulates HIV-1 gene expression [63, 75] .
ZAP70. The protein tyrosine kinase ZAP70 (Zeta-chainassociated protein kinase 70) was enriched by 1.24-fold in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat [76] . Furthermore, WB analysis revealed that Tat expression could promote the relocalisation of ZAP70 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, with a distinct enrichment in the nucleolus ( Figure 2 ). Of note, ZAP70 is part of the in vitro nuclear Tat interactome [63] .
Matrin 3. The inner nuclear matrix protein, Matrin 3 (MATR3), presented a 1.39-fold change in the nucleolus of Jurkat cells expressing Tat. It localizes in the nucleolasm with a diffuse pattern excluded from the nucleoli [77] . Matrin 3 has been identified as part of the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Two recent studies have described Matrin 3 as part of ribonucleoprotein complexes also including HIV-1 Rev and (Rev Response Element) RRE-containing HIV-1 RNA, and promoting HIV-1 post-transcriptional regulation [78, 79, 80] .
CASP10. The pro-apototic signaling molecule, Caspase 10 (CASP10), was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.82-fold) [81] . Importantly, Tat expression downregulates CASP10 expression and activity in Jurkat cells [82] .
ADAR1. Adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR1), which converts adenosines to inosines in double-stranded RNA, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat-Tat cells (0.78-fold). Interestingly, ADAR1 over-expression up-regulates HIV-1 replication via an RNA editing mechanism [83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88] . Furthermore, ADAR1 belongs to the in vitro HIV-1 Tat nuclear interactome [63] .
To underline the structural and functional relationships of the nucleolar proteins affected by HIV-1 Tat, we constructed a network representation of our dataset. We employed Cytoscape version 2.6.3 [89] and using the MiMI plugin [90] to map previously characterised interactions, extracted from protein interaction databases (BIND, DIP, HPRD, CCSB, Reactome, IntAct and MINT). This resulted in a highly dense and connected network comprising 416 proteins (nodes) out of the 536 proteins, linked by 5060 undirected interactions (edges) ( Figure 3A ). Centrality analysis revealed a threshold of 23.7 interactions per protein. Topology analysis using the CentiScaPe plugin [91] showed that the node degree distribution follows a power law ( Figure S5 ), characteristic of a scale-free network. Importantly, when we analysed the clustering coefficient distribution ( Figure S6 ) we found that the network is organised in a hierarchical architecture [92] , where connected nodes are part of highly clustered areas maintained by few hubs organised around HIV-1 Tat. Furthermore, node degree connection analysis of our network identified HIV-1 Tat as the most connected protein ( Figure S6 ). Specifically, the topology analysis indicated that the values for Tat centralities were the highest (Node degree, stress, radiality, closeness, betweeness and centroid), characterising Tat as the main hub protein of the nucleolar network. Indeed, a total of 146 proteins have been previously described to interact with Tat ( Figure 3B , Table S2 ). These proteins are involved in a wide range of cellular processes including chromosomal organization, DNA and RNA processing and cell cycle control. Importantly, aver the third of these proteins exhibit an increase in fold ratio change (59 proteins with a ratio .1.2 fold).
In parallel, we characterised the magnitude of the related protein abundance changes observed in distinct cellular pathways ( Figure 4) .
Ribosomal biogenesis. We initially focused on ribosome biogenesis, the primary function of the nucleolus. We could observe a general and coordinated increase in the abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus by Tat expression (Figure 4 ). While some ribosomal proteins remained unaffected, Tat caused the nucleolar accumulation of several distinct large and small ribosomal proteins, except RPL35A, for which Tat expression caused a marked decrease at the nucleolar level (0.29-fold). Similarly, several proteins involved in rRNA processing exhibited an overall increase in nucleolar accumulation upon Tat expression. These include human canonical members of the L7ae family together with members participating in Box C/D, H/ACA and U3 snoRNPs ( Figure 4) . Conversely, BOP1, a component of the PeBoW (Pescadillo Bop1 WDR12) complex essential for maturation of the large ribosomal subunit, was significantly depleted from the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat cells (0.81-fold) and this was confirmed by WB analysis (Figure 2 ) [93] . Nevertheless, the other PeBoW complex components, Pes1 (0.94-fold) and WDR12 (1.1fold), were not affected by Tat expression. Of note, we did not detect change in the abundance of protein participating in rDNA transcription such as RNAPOLI, UBF.
Spliceosome. We identified and quantified in our dataset 55 proteins out of the 108 known spliceosomal proteins [94] . These proteins include the small nuclear ribonucleoproteins U1, U2 and U5, Sm D1, D2, D3, F and B, and the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins. Our data suggested a distinct increase in the abundance of specific spliceosome complex proteins upon expression of HIV-1 Tat in Jurkat T-cells (Figure 3 and 4) . The only three proteins that were significantly depleted from the nucleolus upon expression of HIV-1 Tat were RBMX (0.89-fold), HNRNPA2B1 (0.84-fold) and SNRPA (0.81-fold). Several investigations showed expression alteration in cellular splicing factors in HIV-1 infected cells [95, 96] .
Molecular chaperones. We have identified several molecular chaperones, co-chaperones and other factors involved into proteostasis to be highly enriched in the nucleolus of T-cells upon Tat expression (Figure 3 and 4) , many of which were previously characterised as part of the Tat nuclear interactome [63] . Several heat-shock proteins including DNAJs, specific HSP90, HSP70 and HSP40 isoforms and their co-factors were distinctively enriched in the nucleolar fraction of Jurkat cells expressing Tat ( Figure 4 ). As shown by WB, while HSP90a and b are mostly cytoplasmic, Tat expression triggers their relocalisation to the nucleus and nucleolus, corroborating our proteomic quantitative approach (Figure 2) . Similarly, heat-shock can cause the HSP90 and HSP70 to relocalise to the nucleolus [97, 98, 99, 100, 101] . In a recent study, Fassati's group has shown that HSP90 is present at the HIV-1 promoter and may directly regulate viral gene expression [102] . We also observed the coordinated increased abundance of class I (GroEL and GroES) and class II (chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CTT)) chaperonin molecules (Figure 3 and 4) upon Tat expression.
Ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. The ubiquitin-proteasome pathway is the major proteolytic system of eukaryotic cells [103] . Importantly, the nuclear ubiquitin-proteasome pathway controls the supply of ribosomal proteins and is important to ribosome biogenesis [104, 105] . The 26S proteasome is composed of the 20S core particle (CP) and the 19S regulatory particle (RP). Alternatively, CP can associate with the 11S RP to form the immunoproteasome. All the quantified proteins in our study are part of the 19S regulatory complex and include PSMD2 (1.5-fold), PSMD3 (1.32-fold), PSMD11 (1.25-fold) and PSMD13 (0.72-fold), the only proteasome component significantly depleted from the nucleolus in the presence of Tat (Figure 4) . Interestingly, Tat interacts with distinct subunits of the proteasome system, including the 19S, 20S and 11S subunits. The consequences of these interactions include the competition of Tat with 11S RP or 19S RP for binding to the 20S CP, which resulted in the inhibition of the 20S peptidase activity [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111] . Furthermore, Tat was shown to modify the proteasome composition and activity, which affects the generation of peptide antigens recognized by cytotoxic T-lymphocytes [112] . Importantly, a recent study demonstrated that in the absence of Tat, proteasome components are associated to the HIV-1 promoter and proteasome activity limits transcription [113] . Addition of Tat promoted the dissociation of the 19S subunit from the 20S proteasome, followed by the distinct enrichment of the 19S-like complex in nuclear extracts together with the Tat-mediated recruitment of the 19S subunits to the HIV-1 promoter, which facilitated its transcriptional elongation [113] . We also quantified UBA1 (1.36-fold), the E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase UHRF1 (1.13-fold), UBC (1-fold) and two Ubiquitinspecific-peptidases, USP30 (1.28-fold) and USP20 (0.06-fold) (Figure 4) .
DNA replication and repair. Upon HIV-1 Tat expression, we observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of several cellular factors associated with DNA replication and repairs pathways (Figure 4) .
Tat induced the coordinated enrichment of the miniature chromosome maintenance MCM2-7 complex (from 1.23-to 3.30fold, respectively) [114] . MCM7, 6 and 3 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . The structural maintenance of chromosomes 2, SMC2, was enriched (1.35-fold) in the nucleolar fraction by Tat expression. SMC2 was identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . While replication factor C1 (RFC1) and RFC2 (1.31-and 1.28-fold respectively) displayed an increased fold change and RFC5/3 were not affected, RFC4 was severely depleted (0.69-fold) from the nucleolar fraction upon Tat expression [115] . RFC1 and RFC2 were identified as part of the in vitro nuclear interactome of HIV-1 Tat [63] . Tat induced the enrichment of XRCC6 (1.27-fold) and XRCC5 (1.36-fold) in the nucleolus, which are involved in the repair of non-homologous DNA end joining (NHEJ) [116] . XRCC6 associates with viral preintegration complexes containing HIV-1 Integrase and also interact with Tat and TAR [117, 118, 119] . Furthermore, in a ribozyme-based screen, XRCC5 (Ku80) knockdown decreased both retroviral integration and Tatmediated transcription [120] . As part of the base excision repair (BER), we have identified a major apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APEX1) (1.29-fold) . Importantly, in a siRNA screen targeting DNA repair factors, APEX1 knockdown was found to inhibit HIV-1 infection by more 60% [121] . The high mobility group (HMG) protein, HMGA1 (1.30-fold), was enriched in the nucleolus following Tat expression [122] . HMGA1 interact with HIV-1 Integrase and is part of the HIV-1 pre-integration complex [123, 124] . Importantly, HMGA1 has been identified in a proteomic screen, as a cellular cofactor interacting with the HIV-1 59leader [125] .
Metabolism. Our proteomic data suggest that Tat induces perturbations in glycolysis, the pentose phosphate pathway, and nucleotide and amino acid biosynthesis (Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Notably, in T cells expressing Tat, we detected co-ordinated changes in the abundance of proteins not previously known to be associated with Tat pathogenesis, which revealed unexpected connections with with glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, including the following glycolitic enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase B (LDHB) (1.37-fold), glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (1.17-fold) and phosphoglyceric acid mutase (PGAM1) (0.89-fold) ( Figure 4 and Figure S7 ). Briefly, GPI catalyzes the reversible isomerization of glucose-6-phosphate in fructose-6-phosphate. Subsequently, PFKP catalyzes the irreversible conversion of fructose-6-phosphate to fructose-1,6-bisphosphate and is a key regulatory enzyme in glycolysis. At the end of the glycolytic pathway, PKM2, in its tetrameric form, is known to generate ATP and pyruvate, while LDHB diverts the majority of the pyruvate to lactate production and regeneration of NAD+ in support to continued glycolysis, a phenomenon described for proliferative Tcells [126] . Of note, in highly proliferating cells, PKM2 can be found in its dimeric form and its activity is altered. This upregulates the availibility of glucose intermediates, which are rerouted to the pentose phosphate and serine biosynthesis pathways for the production of biosynthetic precursors of nucleotides, phospholipids and amino acids. As part of the pentose phosphate pathway, we have characterised the significant enrichment of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) (2.11-fold), which branches of the glycolysis pathway to generate NADPH, ribose-5phosphate an important precursor for the synthesis of nucleotides. Consistent with this, we detected the coordinated increase in the abundance of enzymes which plays a central role in the synthesis of purines and pyrimidines. More specifically, IMPDH2 (1.66fold), a rate-limiting enzyme at the branch point of purine nucleotide biosynthesis, leading to the generation of guanine nucleotides, phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase 2 (PRPS2) (1.41-fold), cytidine-5-prime-triphosphate synthetase (CTPS) (1.74-fold) which catalyses the conversion of UTP to CTP and the ribonucleotide reductase large subunit (RRM1) (1.56-fold). In parralel, we noted the increased abundance of the phosphoserine aminotransferase PSAT1 (1.90-fold), an enzyme implicated in serine biosynthesis, which has been linked with cell proliferation in vitro.
The host-virus interface is a fundamental aspect in defining the molecular pathogenesis of HIV-1 [127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133] . Indeed, with its limited repertoire of viral proteins, HIV-1 relies extensively on the host cell machinery for its replication. Several recent studies have capitalized on the recent advances in the ''OMICS'' technologies, and have revealed important insights into this finely tuned molecular dialogue [132, 134] . HIV-1 Tat is essential for viral replication and orchestrates HIV-1 gene expression. The viral regulatory protein is known to interact with an extensive array of cellular proteins and to modulate cellular gene expression and signaling pathway [135, 136] . We and others have employed system-level approaches to investigate Tat interplay with the host cell machinery, which have characterised HIV-1 Tat as a critical mediator of the host-viral interface [137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149] . Here, we have investigated the nucleolar proteins trafficking in response to HIV-1 Tat expression in T-cells, with the view to provide unique and novel insights on the role of proteins compartimentalisation by Tat in the fine-tuning of protein availability and function.
We have developed for this study, a cellular model using Jurkat T-cells stably expressing Tat fused in its N-ternminal to TAP-tag.
Jurkat T-cells are robust and present the advantage to grow without stimulations and are easely transduced using retroviral gene delivery. Importantly, they have been widely employed to evaluate Tat-mediated pathogenesis using system-wide approaches and to analyse T-cell key cellular signaling pathways and functions [144, 150, 151, 152] . Indeed, we have found them particularly suited for prolongued in vitro culture in SILAC medium and subsequent isolation of their nucleolus followed by MS analysis, which requires up to 85 millions of cells. We fused Tat to the TAP tag to enable future downstream applications such as Tandem affinity purification or Chromatin IP analysis. Importantly, we have confirm that N-terminal TAP-tag did not interfere with Tat function nor its localisation in Jurkat cells, when compared to untagged-Tat. Of note, Tat subcellular distribution can vary according to the cell type employed. While Tat is known to accumulate in the nucleus and nucleolus in Jurkat cells and other transformed cell lines, in primary T-cells, Tat was described to primarily accumulate at the plasma membrane, while trafficking via the nucleus where it functions [32] . These differences remain to be characterised but could be related to different expression levels of transport factors in transformed cell lines versus primary cells, as recently described by Kuusisto et al. [39] . Furthermore, Stauber and Pavlakis have suggested that Tat nucleolar localisation could be the results of Tat overexpression [31] . Here, we have selected and employed a polyclonal population of Jurkat T-cells expressing Tat at different levels. We propose that this heterogeneity in Tat expression levels might reflect Tat stochastic expression described during viral replication [153] .
Using a quantitative proteomic strategy based on an organellar approach, we quantified over 520 nucleolar proteins, including 49 proteins exhibiting a significant fold change. The extent to which the induced variations in the abundance of nucleolar proteins are biologically relevant and can affect cellular and/or viral processes remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the biological nature of the pathways and macromolecular complexes affected enable us to discuss their potential associations with HIV-1 pathogenesis.
HIV-1 Tat is expressed early following HIV-1 genome integration and mediates the shift to the viral production phase, associated with robust proviral gene expression, viral proteins assembly and ultimately, virions budding and release. In this context and based on our results, we propose that Tat could participate in shaping the intracellular environment and metabolic profile of T cells to favor host biosynthetic activities supporting robust virions production. Indeed, we observed the distinct nucleolar enrichment of ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis, which could be indicative of an increase in protein synthesis. With the notable exeption of RPL35A nucleolar depletion, ribosomal proteins and enzymes associated with ribosomal biogenesis were in the top 20 most enriched nucleolar proteins (NHP2L1, RLP14, RPL17, RPL27, RPS2, RPL13). Furthermore, this effect appears to be specific to HIV-1 Tat since transcription inhibition by Actinomycin D resulted in the overall depletion of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus [9] . Moreover, quantitative proteomics analysis of the nucleous in adenovirus-infected cells showed a mild decrease in ribosomal proteins [24] . Whether this reflect a shift in ribosome biogenesis and/or a change in the composition of the ribosomal subunits remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the adapted need for elevated ribosome production is intuitive for a system that needs to support the increased demand for new viral proteins synthesis. In parralel, we observed the concordant modulation of pathways regulating protein homeostasis. We noted the significant nucleolar accumulation of multiple molecular chaperones including the HSPs, the TCP-1 complex, and CANX/CALR molecules and the disrupted nucleolar abundance of proteins belonging to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, which controls the supply of ribosomal proteins [104, 105] . These observations further support previous studies describibing the modulation of the proteasomal activity by Tat, which affect the expression, assembly, and localization of specific subunits of the proteasomal complexes [106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 113] . We also observed the concomitant depletion of CASP10 in the nucleolus of Jurkat TAP-Tat. It has been suggested that CASP10 could be targeted to the nucleolus to inhibit protein synthesis [154] . Interestingly, the presence and potential roles of molecular chaperones in the nucleolus have been highlighted by Banski et al, who elaborate on how the chaperone network could regulate ribosome biogenesis, cell signaling, and stress response [97, 155] . As viral production progresses into the late phase and cellular stress increases, nucleolar enrichment of molecular chaperones by Tat could not only enable adequat folding of newly synthetised viral proteins but could also promote tolerance of infected cells to stress and maintain cell viability.
Coincidentally, we observed the marked nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to metabolic pathways including glycolysis, pentose phosphate, nucleotide and amino acid biosynthetic pathways. Similarly, these pathways are elevated in proliferative T-cells or in cancer cells following a metabolic shift to aerobic glycolysis, also known as the Warburg effect [156, 157, 158, 159] . There, glucose intermediates from the glycolysis pathway are not only commited to energy production and broke-down into pyruvate for the TCA cycle, but are redirected to alternative pathways, including the pentose phosphate pathway, and used as metabolic precursors to produce nucleotides, amino acids, acetyl CoA and NADPH for redox homeostasis. Consistently, we also noted the concomittant nucleolar enrichment of enzymes belonging to the nucleotide synthesis pathway, including IMPH2, a rate limiting enzyme known to control the pool of GTP. Similarly, we noted the nucleolar enrichment of PSAT1, an enzyme involved in serine and threonin metabolism, which is associated with cellular proliferation [160] . Collectively, we propose that by controlling protein homeostasis and metabolic pathways, Tat could meet both the energetic and biosynthetic demand of HIV-1 productive infection.
Of note, while nucleotide metabolism enzymes are associated with the nucleus, glycolysis takes place in the cytoplasm. Nevertheless, glycolytic enzymes have been detected in both the nuclear and nucleolar fractions by proteomic analyses [8, 161] . Furthermore glycolytic enzymes, such as PKM2, LDH, phosphoglycerate kinase, GAPDH, and aldolase, also have been reported to display nuclear localization and bind to DNA [162] . More specifically, PKM2 is known to associate with promoter and participate in the regulation of gene expression as a transcriptional coactivator [163] .
HIV-1 Tat has previously been described as an immunoregulator and more specifically, has been reported both to inhibit or to promote TCR signaling [164] . We have observed the nucleolar enrichment by Tat of key proximal or downstream components of T-cell signaling pathways, including ZAP70, ILF3 and STAT3, which play crucial roles in T-cell development and activation. We had previously identified them as T-cell specific components of the nucleolus, and IF studies suggested that their association with the nucleolus could be regulated by specific conditions [165] . Our results further support that Tat could contribute to the dysregulation of TCR-derived signals and that the nucleolus could represent an important spatial link for TCR signaling molecules.
We observed the coordinated nucleolar enrichment of key components of the DNA replication, recombination and repair pathways by Tat. These include XRCC5 and XRCC6, HMGA1, APEX1, MCM2-7, SMC2, RFC1 and RFC2, while RFC4 was found to be significantly depleted. Interestingly, these cofactors have been associated with the efficiency of retroviral DNA integration into the host DNA or the integrity of integrated provirus [166] . Whether the increased abundance of these factors within the nucleolus could be associated with their potential participation in the integration and maintenance of provirus gene integrity, remains to be determined.
The mechanisms of Tat-mediated segregation and compartimentalisation of proteins in or out of the nucleolus may depend on factor(s) inherent for each protein and the nature of their relationship with Tat, since subcellular fractionation combined with WB analysis showed that the pattern and extent of subcellular redistribution between proteins varied. We could observe cases where Tat upregulated the expression of proteins which resulted in a general increase of theses proteins throughout the cellular compartments including the nucleolus (DDX3, TNPO1). Alternatively, Tat could trigger the nucleolar translocation of proteins directly from the cytoplasm or the nucleoplasm (pRb). Additionally, we observed cytoplasmic proteins redistributed to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus upon Tat expression (STAT3, ZAP70 and HSP90). Finally, we also noted protein depletion in the nucleolar fraction accompanied by an increase in the nucleoplasm (SSRP1). It remains difficult at this stage, to appreciate whether the accumulation of specific proteins would result in their activation or inhibition by sequestering them away from their site of action. Conversely, the depletion of a protein from the nucleolus could either result in the down-regulation of its activity in this location or could be the result of its mobilization from its storage site, the nucleolus, to the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm where it can perform its function. Remarkably, we identified several known HIV-1 Tat partners involved in HIV-1 pathogenesis, which suggests that Tat could physically modulate their nucleolar targeting or their recruitment to specific site in the nucleoplasm or cytoplasm. Tat could also promote post-translational modifications, which could mediate the targeting of specific proteins to the nucleolus. This is exemplified by the following enriched proteins, pRb, PP1 and STAT3, for which phosphorylation is induced by Tat. Importantly, their phosphorylation status determines their subcellular distribution, thus providing a potential mechanism for their redistribution by Tat. Moreover, our data indicates that serine/threonine kinases (CK2 a') and phosphatases (PP1) were significantly enriched in the nucleolar fractions of Jurkat TAP-Tat. These enzymes account for the majority of the phosphorylation/ dephosphorylation activity in the nucleolus and can act as regulators of nucleolar protein trafficking. In addition, Tat significantly decreased the levels of SUMO-2 in the nucleolus. Similarly, SUMO-mediated post-translational modifications are known to modulate nucleolar protein localization [104] . Given the potential importance of post-translational modifications, including phosphorylation in the Tat-mediated change of abundance of nucleolar proteins, a more targeted proteomic approach such as the enrichment for phosphopetides, would extend the resolution of our screening approach.
The control of protein turnover is also an important mean to modulate the abundance of nucleolar proteins. Ribosomal proteins are degraded by the Ubiquitin-Proteasome pathway to ensure their abundance matches up with rRNA transcription levels. Conversely, heat shock proteins HSP90s protect them from degradation. Interestingly, our data showing that Tat modulation the abundance proteins associated with the Ubiquitin-proteasome and heat-shock pathway. This could contribute to the observed enrichment of ribosomal proteins by Tat. Nevertheless, we cannot exclude that the increased abundance of ribosomal proteins in the nucleolus could be the result of Tat-mediated prevention of their export to the cytoplasm. Interestingly, using a different cellular system, a drosophila melanogaster Tat transgenic strain, Ponti et al, analysed the effects of Tat on ribosome biogenesis, following 3 days heat shock treatment to induce Tat expression under the control of the hsp70 promoter [167] . Following Tat expression, they observed a defect in pre-rRNA processing associated with a decrease in the level of 80S ribosomes [167] . Nevertheless, the different cellular system employed combined with the 3 days heatshock induction make their results difficult to compare with ours.
While previous system-level studies have monitored the effects of HIV-1 Tat expression on T cells, to our knowledge, we have presented here the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression. Using quantitative proteomics, we have underlined the changes in abundance of specific nucleolar proteins and have highlighted the extensive and coordinated nucleolar reorganization in response to Tat constitutive expression. Our findings underscore that Tat expressing T-cells exhibit a unique nucleolar proteomic profile, which may reflect a viral strategy to facilitate the progression to robust viral production. Importantly, we noted the functional relationship of nucleolar proteins of our dataset with HIV-1 pathogenesis and HIV-1 Tat in particular. This further increases our confidence in our experimental strategy and suggests a role for Tat in the spatial control and subcellular compartimentaliation of these cellular cofactors. Ultimatly, our study provides new insights on the importance of Tat in the cross talk between nucleolar functions and viral pathogenesis. Importantly, we have also identified changes in nucleolar protein abundance that were not previously associated with HIV-1 pathogenesis, including proteins associated with metabolic pathways, which provide new potential targets and cellular pathways for therapeutic intervention.
Jurkat T-cells, clone E6.1 (ATCC), Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were maintained in RPMI-1640 medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (Gibco, EU approved), and antibiotics. Phoenix-GP cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/ group/nolan/), were maintained in DMEM medium supplemented with 10% (v/v) foetal bovine serum (GIBCO, EU approved). Cells were counted using Scepter TM 2.0 Cell Counter (Millipore).
The sequence of HIV-1 Tat (HIV-1 HXB2, 86 amino acids) was sub-cloned into pENTR 2B vector (Invitrogen, A10463). Using the Gateway technology (Invitrogen), we introduced the HIV-1 Tat sequence into the plasmid pCeMM-NTAP(GS)-Gw [168] . Phoenix cells (G.P. Nolan; www.stanford.edu/group/ nolan/), were transfected using Fugene 6 (Roche) with 5 mg of the plasmid NTAP-Tat or NTAP and 3 mg of the pMDG-VSVG. Viral supernatants were collected after 48 h, filtered and used to transduce the Jurkat cell lines. The construct is termed NTAP-Tat, the empty vector was termed NTAP. Using retroviral gene delivery, we stably transduced Jurkat cells (clone E6.1 (ATCC)). The positive clones named Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were sorted to enrich the population of cells expressing GFP using the BC MoFlo XDP cell sorter (Beckman Coulter).
Sub-cellular fractions (10 mg) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and transferred onto BioTrace PVDF membranes (Pall corporation). The following primary antibodies were used: a-Tubulin (Sc 5286), C23 (Sc 6013), and Fibrillarin (Sc 25397) were from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, and PARP (AM30) from Calbiochem, mouse anti-ZAP 70 (05-253, Millipore), rabbit anti-STAT3 (06-596, Millipore), rabbit anti-ILF3 (ab92355, Abcam), rabbit anti-HSP90 beta (ab32568, Abcam), mouse anti-ADAR1 (ab88574, Abcam), rabbit anti-HDAC1 (ab19845, Abcam), rabbit anti-SSRP1 (ab21584, Abcam) rabbit anti-BOP1 (ab86982, Abcam), mouse anti-KpNB1 (ab10303, Abcam), rabbit anti-HIV-1 Tat (ab43014, Abcam), rabbit anti-CK2A (ab10466, Abcam), rabbit anti-DDX3X (ab37160, Abcam), mouse anti-TNPO1 (ab2811, Abcam), mouse anti-HSP90A (CA1023, MERCK), and rabbit-anti RB1 (sc-102, Santa Cruz).The following secondary antibodies were used ECL: Anti-mouse IgG and ECL Anti-rabbit IgG (GE Healthcare), and Donkey anti-goat IgG (Sc 2020) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
For SILAC analysis SILAC-RPMI R0K0 and SILAC-RPMI R6K6 (Dundee cells) media supplemented with 10% dialyzed FBS (GIBCO, 26400-036) were used. The Jurkat cells expressing NTAP-Tat and NTAP were serially passaged and grown for five doublings to ensure full incorporation of the labelled amino acids. Cells viability was checked with Trypan Blue (0.4% solution, SIGMA) and further confirmed using PI staining and FACS analysis. Cells were mixed to the ratio 1:1 to obtain 140610 6 cells. Nucleoli were isolated from the mixed cell population as previously described in Jarboui et al., [165] .
Nucleolar extracts (100 mg) were resuspended in 50 mM ammonium bicarbonate and in solution trypsin digested as previously described in Jarboui et al. [165] . Sample was run on a Thermo Scientific LTQ ORBITRAP XL mass spectrometer connected to an Eksigent NANO LC.1DPLUS chromatography system incorporating an auto-sampler. Sample was loaded onto a Biobasic C18 PicofritTM column (100 mm length, 75 mm ID) and was separated by an increasing acetonitrile gradient, using a 142 min reverse phase gradient (0-40% acetonitrile for 110 min) at a flow rate of 300 nL min-1. The mass spectrometer was operated in positive ion mode with a capillary temperature of 200uC, a capillary voltage of 46V, a tube lens voltage of 140V and with a potential of 1800 V applied to the frit. All data was acquired with the mass spectrometer operating in automatic data dependent switching mode. A high resolution MS scan was performed using the Orbitrap to select the 5 most intense ions prior to MS/MS analysis using the Ion trap.
The incorporation efficiency of labelled amino-acids was determined by analysing the peptides identified in isolated nucleoli from cell population maintained in ''Heavy'' medium as described in [169] . Our analysis showed that we had an incorporation efficiency .95% (data not shown).
The MS/MS spectra were searched for peptides identification and quantification using the MaxQuant software [170] (version 1.1.1.36), the Human IPI Database (version 3.83) and the Andromeda search engine associated to MaxQuant [171] . Standard settings were used for MaxQuant with the Acetyl (Protein N-term) as variable modification and Carbamidomethyl (Cys) as fixed modification, 2 missed cleavage were allowed, except that the filtering of labelled amino acids was prohibited. Initial mass deviation of precursor ion and fragment ions were 7 ppm and 0.5 Da, respectively. Each protein ratio was calculated as the intensity-weighted average of the individual peptides ratios. Proteins were identified with the minimum of one peptide with a false discovery rate less than 1%.
Gene ontology, KEGG pathway and Pfam terms were extracted from UNIPROT entries using Perseus, a software from the MaxQuant Data analysis package (http://www.maxquant.org ), and the ToppGene suite tools [54] .
The Jurkat NTAP-Tat and Jurkat NTAP were transfected using the Amaxa electroporation system (Amaxa biosystem) with the pGL3 (pGL3-LTR) (Promega) as recommended by Amaxa Biosystem. Dual-luciferase assays (Promega) were performed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Luciferase activity was measured and normalized against the total amount of proteins as quantified by the BCA protein quantification kit (Pierce, Thermo Scientific).
To preserve their original shape, we performed immunostaining of Jurkat cells in suspension. Cells were fixed in 2% PFA for 10 min at RT, permeabilised in 0.5% Triton X-100 for 15 min at RT and blocked with 5% FCS. Cells were incubated with the rabbit HIV-1 Tat antibody (ab43014, Abcam) followed by the secondary antibody anti-Rabbit alexa fluor 647 (A-21246, Invitrogen). Cells were allowed to attach to Cell-Tak (BD) coated Silanised Slides (DaoCytomation), and stained with DAPI. Images were captured with a Carl Zeiss Confocal Microscope equipped with a Plan-Apochromat 63X/1.4 oil DIC objective.
The proteomics RAW Data file from the mass spectrometry analysis was deposited to the Tranche repository(https:// proteomecommons.org/tranche/) [172] . The file can be accessed and downloaded using the following hash key:
(R3O5SV5Z6HvWqrBNDhp21tXFetluDWYxvwMIfU-h6e1kMgarauCSq4dlNcxeUvFOHDEzLeDcg4X5Y8reSb6-MUA6wM1kIAAAAAAAAB/w = = ). Materials and Methods S1 Description of the methods employed to examine cell cycle, cell viability and cell proliferation analysis.
(DOCX) | What is the significance of this study? | 5,148 | the first proteomic analysis of dynamic composition of the nucleolus in response to HIV-1 Tat expression | 45,092 |
1,687 | Interactome analysis of the lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus nucleoprotein in infected cells reveals ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit Alpha 1 and prohibitin as host-cell factors involved in the life cycle of mammarenaviruses
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834214/
SHA: efbd0dfc426da5dd25ce29411d6fa37571623773
Authors: Iwasaki, Masaharu; Minder, Petra; Caì, Yíngyún; Kuhn, Jens H.; Yates, John R.; Torbett, Bruce E.; de la Torre, Juan C.
Date: 2018-02-20
DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892
License: cc0
Abstract: Several mammalian arenaviruses (mammarenaviruses) cause hemorrhagic fevers in humans and pose serious public health concerns in their endemic regions. Additionally, mounting evidence indicates that the worldwide-distributed, prototypic mammarenavirus, lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance. Concerns about human-pathogenic mammarenaviruses are exacerbated by of the lack of licensed vaccines, and current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to off-label use of ribavirin that is only partially effective. Detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions may facilitate the development of novel anti-mammarenavirus strategies by targeting components of the host-cell machinery that are required for efficient virus multiplication. Here we document the generation of a recombinant LCMV encoding a nucleoprotein (NP) containing an affinity tag (rLCMV/Strep-NP) and its use to capture the NP-interactome in infected cells. Our proteomic approach combined with genetics and pharmacological validation assays identified ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit alpha 1 (ATP1A1) and prohibitin (PHB) as pro-viral factors. Cell-based assays revealed that ATP1A1 and PHB are involved in different steps of the virus life cycle. Accordingly, we observed a synergistic inhibitory effect on LCMV multiplication with a combination of ATP1A1 and PHB inhibitors. We show that ATP1A1 inhibitors suppress multiplication of Lassa virus and Candid#1, a live-attenuated vaccine strain of Junín virus, suggesting that the requirement of ATP1A1 in virus multiplication is conserved among genetically distantly related mammarenaviruses. Our findings suggest that clinically approved inhibitors of ATP1A1, like digoxin, could be repurposed to treat infections by mammarenaviruses pathogenic for humans.
Text: Introduction Mammarenaviruses (Arenaviridae: Mammarenavirus) cause chronic infections of rodents worldwide [1] . Invasion of human dwellings by infected rodents can result in human infections through mucosal exposure to aerosols or by direct contact of abraded skin with infectious material. Several mammarenaviruses cause viral hemorrhagic fevers (VHFs) in humans and pose important public health problems in their endemic areas [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] . Mammarenaviruses are classified into two main groups, Old World (OW) and New World (NW) [1] . The OW Lassa virus (LASV), causative agent of Lassa fever (LF), is the most significant OW mammarenaviral pathogen. LASV is estimated to infect several hundred thousand individuals annually in Western Africa, resulting in a high number of LF cases associated with high morbidity and lethality. Moreover, LASV endemic regions are expanding [7] , and the association of the recently identified mammarenavirus Lujo virus with a VHF outbreak in Southern Africa [8, 9] has raised concerns about the emergence of novel VHF-causing mammarenaviruses. The most significant NW mammarenavirus is Junín virus (JUNV), which causes Argentinian hemorrhagic fever [10] . The worldwide-distributed OW mammarenavirus lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance especially in congenital infections [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] . Moreover, LCMV poses a particular threat to immunocompromised individuals, as has been illustrated by fatal cases of LCMV infection associated with organ transplants [16, 17] . However, LCMV research can be safely performed at BSL-2 containment, rather than the BSL-4 containment necessary for live LASV or JUNV research [18] .
No US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-licensed vaccines are available for the treatment of arenavirus infections, although a live attenuated vaccine strain of JUNV, Candid#1, is licensed in Argentina. Likewise, current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to an offlabel use of the nucleoside analogue ribavirin that is only partially effective and can cause significant side effects [19] [20] [21] . Development of effective anti-mammarenavirus drugs has been hampered by the lack of detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions required for mammarenavirus multiplication that could represent amenable targets for antiviral therapy. the potential problem that overexpression of a single viral gene product may potentiate PPI interactions that are not relevant during the course of a natural virus infection. To overcome this issue, we designed a recombinant LCMV (rLCMV) encoding a tandem [WSHPQFEK (GGGS) 3 WSHPQFEK] Strep-tag fused to the amino-terminus of NP (rLCMV/Strep-NP) (Fig 1A and 1B) . To facilitate the identification of specific PPI between NP and host cell proteins, we used our mammarenavirus tri-segmented (r3) platform [30] to design an r3LCMV expressing a C-terminus Strep-tag version of enhanced green fluorescent protein (r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep) that we used as a negative control (Fig 1A and 1B) . We rescued rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep and confirmed the expression of strep-tagged NP and eGFP in rLCMV/ Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, respectively (Fig 1C) . Next, we examined the growth properties of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep in three different cells lines from hamsters, humans, and nonhuman primates (BHK-21, A549, and Vero E6 cells, respectively) (Fig 1D) . The fitness of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep was modestly decreased compared to that observed with wild-type (WT) Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and Clone 13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains of LCMV. However, both rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep had WT-like growth kinetics and reached high titers. As with WT LCMV, infection with rLCMV/Strep-NP prevented production of bioactive IFN-I by cells in response to Sendai virus (SeV) infection as determined using an IFN bioassay based on protection against the cytopathic effect (CPE) induced by infection with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) (Fig 1E) . Vero cells treated for 16 h with tissue cultured supernatants (TCS) from A549 cells infected first with WT LCMV or rLCMV/Strep, followed by 24 h infection with SeV, remained fully susceptible to VSV-induced CPE. In contrast, Vero cells treated with TCS from A549 cells infected with rLCMV/NP(D382A), a mutant unable to prevent induction of IFN-I [30] , and subsequently with SeV, were protected against VSV induced CPE.
We selected the human A549 cell line because lung epithelial cells are one of the initial cell targets of humans following inhalation of mammarenavirions. We infected A549 cells (multiplicity of infection [MOI] = 0.1) with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep (Fig 2A) . At 48 h post-inoculation (pi), we prepared total cell lysates for pull-down (PD) assays using a sepharose resin coated with strep-tactin. Aliquots of the protein complexes present in the PD samples were fractionated by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) (Fig 2B) followed by SYPRO Ruby protein gel staining. We compared the pattern of stained protein bands detected between rLCMV/Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strepinfected samples and confirmed the presence of Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep in pertinent samples (Fig 2B) . Protein complexes in the rest of eluates from the PD samples were concentrated by trichloroacetic acid (TCA) precipitation and subjected to trypsin digestion (Fig 2A) . Digested peptides were subjected to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) analysis using a hybrid mass spectrometer consisting of linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap (LTQ) Velos and an Orbitrap analyser.
We classified host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS analysis from two independent biological replicates into two groups: 1) proteins found only in Strep-NP PD samples with at least five spectral counts ( Table 1) , and 2) proteins found in both Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep PD samples with five or higher spectral counts in Strep-NP samples and at least 2-fold higher spectral counts in Strep-NP PD compared to eGFP PD samples ( Table 2) . Filtering the data using these criteria resulted in identification of 139 candidate host-cell proteins as NP-interacting partners. Among 53 proteins found present in both NP-and eGFP-PD samples, 36 had spectral counts in the NP-PD sample that were less than two-fold higher than their corresponding spectral counts in the eGFP-PD sample (Fig 2C and S1 Table) . Based on the criteria we described above, we considered these proteins to be highly unlikely specific NPinteractors with an involvement in the LCMV life cycle, and therefore we did not consider these hits for further analysis. However, we acknowledge that we cannot formally rule out that some of these hits could still play a role on the life cycle of LCMV.
The protein annotation through evolutionary relationship (PANTHER) protein family classification (Biological Process) of the NP-interacting protein candidates revealed that a large number of proteins were involved in metabolic and cellular processes (Fig 2D) . We also analyzed the molecular functions of the NP-interacting protein candidates according to the PAN-THER protein profile classification (Fig 2E) , which revealed diversified biochemical functions enriched for nucleic acid-binding proteins and chaperones.
To initially assess pro-or anti-viral roles of NP-interacting host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS, we examined the effect of small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated knockdown (kd) of each of the corresponding genes on multiplication of rLCMV expressing reporter gene ZsGreen (ZsG) in A549 cells (Fig 3A) . The siRNAs we used were from the genome-wide ON TARGET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene). OTPs are latest generation of siRNAs and offer significant advantages over previous generations. Off-target effects are primarily driven by antisense strand microRNA (miR)-like seed activity. In OTPs, the sense strand is modified to favor antisense strand uptake whereas the antisense strand seed region is modified to drastically reduce seed-related off-targeting [33] . In addition, OTPs are designed on the foundation of the SMARTselection algorithm (Dharmacon), widely considered to be the best algorithm for rational siRNA design strategy. Numerous host-cell factors showed an anti-LCMV effect (increased ZsG expression by kd of the genes), including microtubule-associated protein 1B (MAP1B) [ [38] , dengue virus 2 (DENV-2) [39] , and chikungunya virus (CHIKV) [40] .
To begin assessing the potential biological implications of the identified NP-host cell protein interactions, we selected ATP1A1 and PHB given the availability of reagents, existing knowledge about their roles in cell physiology, and evidence of participation in multiplication of other viruses. We confirmed that cells transfected with siRNA specific to ATP1A1 and PHB exhibited the predicted reduced levels in ATP1A1 and PHB protein expression (Fig 3B) . Likewise, we examined whether siRNA-mediated reduced expression levels of ZsGreen correlated with reduced LCMV progeny titers. For this, we transfected A549 cells with siRNA targeting Expression of Strep-tagged proteins. A549 cells seeded (5.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 6-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMVs. At 48 h pi, total cell lysates were prepared, and protein expression was analyzed by western blotting. (D) Growth properties of rLCMV expressing Strep-tagged proteins. BHK-21 (1.75 x 10 5 cells/well), A549 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well), or Vero E6 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well) cells seeded in 24-well plates and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.01) with the indicated rLCMVs. At the indicated times pi, TCSs were collected and virus titers determined by IFFA. Results represent means ± SD of the results of three independent experiments. (E) Lack of induction of IFN-I in cells infected with rLCMV/Strep-NP. A549 cells were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMV or mock-infected, and 36 h later infected with SeV (MOI = 1). At 24 h pi with SeV, TCS were collected and used, following virus inactivation by U.V., to treat Vero E6 cells for 16 h, followed by infection with rVSV (MOI = 0.1) [rVSV(+)] or mockinfection [rVSV (-) ]. At 24 h pi with rVSV, cells were fixed with 4% PFA and stained with crystal violet to assess rVSV-induced cytopathic effect. We used as control rLCMV/NP(D382A) that contains mutation D382A within NP, which has been shown to abrogate the NP's ability to counteract the induction of IFN-I production.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892.g001 ATP1A1 or with NC siRNA 72 h prior to infection with rLCMV/ZsG. We found that siRNAmediated kd of ATP1A1 dramatically inhibited ZsGreen expression (Fig 3Ci) , which was associated with a significant reduction of infectious LCMV progeny (Fig 3Cii) . Our attempts to see interaction between NP and ATP1A1 or NP and PHB by co-immunoprecipitation were unsuccessful. Several possibilities could account for this, including interactions of low affinity or high on/off rate or both. Another consideration is that only a minor fraction of NP might be engaged in the interaction with a given host cell protein, and therefore, detection of these interactions would require highly sensitive methods such as LC-MS/MS. To overcome this problem we used confocal microscopy to examine the co-localization of NP with ATP1A1 and PHB in LCMV-infected cells. Weighted co-localization coefficients (CC), determined by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal, were significantly higher than non-weighted CC, indicating the presence of brighter pixels in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions (Fig 4) .
The cardiac glycoside ouabain is an inhibitor of ATP1A1 that has been used to treat congestive heart failure in European countries [41] . The PHB inhibitor rocaglamide is a flavagline from an Aglaia tree used in traditional Chinese medicine [42] that has potent anticancer activity [43] . To examine whether pharmacological inhibition of ATP1A1 or PHB inhibited LCMV multiplication, we pretreated human (A549 and HEK 293T), nonhuman primate (Vero E6), and rodent (murine L929 and hamster BHK-21) cells with ouabain or rocaglamide and infected them with rLCMV/eGFP (S1 Fig). Ouabain treatment resulted in a strong dosedependent inhibition of eGFP expression in infected human-and nonhuman primate cells, but did not affect eGFP expression intensity in infected rodent cells (S1A Fig) . This finding is consistent with rodents expressing an ATP1A1 allele that is resistant to ouabain inhibition [44] .
Likewise, we observed a dose-dependent rocaglamide inhibition of eGFP expression in all cell lines infected with rLCMV/eGFP (S1B Fig) . Consistent with these findings, production of infectious LCMV progeny was reduced by treatment with either ouabain or rocaglamide ( Fig 5A) within a concentration range that had minimal impact on cell viability (Fig 5B) . To examine the correlation between efficacy and cytotoxicity of these compounds, we determined their therapeutic index (TI = CC 50 /IC 50 (Fig 5Bi) ; whereas rocaglamide had TIs of >105 (CC 50 > 1000 nM, IC 50 = 9.51 nM) and 10.3 (CC 50 = 100 nM, IC 50 = 9.75 nM) in A549 and Vero E6 cells, respectively (Fig 5Bii) . Moreover, the ATP1A1 antagonist inhibitor, bufalin, also exhibited robust anti-LCMV activity with TIs of 8.92 (CC 50 Heat shock protein HSP 90-alpha HSP90AA1 P07900 8 10 9
Endoplasmin HSP90B1 P14625 9 9 9
Large neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1 SLC7A5 Q01650 6 12 9
Keratin, type II cuticular Hb1 KRT81 Q14533 10 8 9
Putative helicase MOV-10 MOV10 Q9HCE1 8 10 9
Microtubule-associated protein 1B MAP1B P46821 6 11 8.5
Spectrin beta chain, rocaglamide (100 nM) (Fig 5C) , further supporting a specific anti-LCMV activity of ouabain and rocaglamide that was not due to reduced cell viability.
To gain insights about the mechanisms by which ouabain and rocaglamide exert their anti-LCMV activity, we examined effects of these compounds on distinct steps of the LCMV life cycle. First, we asked whether ouabain and rocaglamide affected cell entry of LCMV. We conducted time-of-addition experiments in which we treated cells with ouabain or rocaglamide prior to virus inoculation (-1.5 h), at the time of inoculation (0 h), or 1.5 h pi (+1.5 h) (Fig 6A) .
In some samples, we used ammonium chloride starting at 4 h pi to block multiple rounds of virus infection. The timing of compound addition did not significantly change the number of eGFP-positive cells, indicating that neither ouabain nor rocaglamide inhibited cell entry of LCMV. The number of eGFP + cells in ouabain-treated cells was reduced at all time-of-addition points compared to vehicle dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-treated cells, but was similar to that observed in ammonium chloride-treated cells. Thus, ouabain did not inhibit LCMV RNA replication and gene expression, but rather a late step of the LCMV life cycle. In contrast, rocaglamide treatment resulted in a negligible number of eGFP + cells, indicating that rocaglamide inhibited virus RNA replication and gene transcription.
To further investigate the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis, we infected A549 cells with a recombinant single-cycle infectious LCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) and treated cells with either ouabain or rocaglamide. Seventy-two hours later, we determined percent normalized eGFP expression in infected cells (Fig 6B) . Consistent with our results from the time-of-addition experiment, ouabain did not affect reporter eGFP expression. However, rocaglamide reduced eGFP expression, confirming inhibitory effect of rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis.
We also examined the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on the late step of the arenavirus life cycle, Z-mediated budding. For this experiment, we transfected cells with Z-Strep-and Z-FLAG (DYKDDDDK epitope)-expressing plasmids from LCMV and LASV, respectively. At 24 h post-transfection, we removed the tissue culture supernatant (TCS) and washed extensively transfected cells to eliminate already budded Z. We cultured the transfected cells in the presence or absence of ouabain or rocaglamide. At 24 h, we determined by WB levels of Z protein in both whole cell lysates and associated with virus-like particles (VLPs) collected from TCS. Treatment with rocaglamide, but not with ouabain, caused a reduction in both LCMV and LASV Z budding efficiency (Fig 6C and 6D) . The reproducibility of these findings was confirmed based on results from four independent experiments (Fig 6E) . We also examined whether ouabain could interfere with a step of assembly of infectious progeny that was not captured by the Z budding assay through two additional experiments. The first experiment involved the use of a newly generated single-cycle infectious recombinant LCMV expressing the reporter gene ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP) to infect (MOI = 0.1) A549 cells (1 st infection). These cells were subsequently transfected with a plasmid expressing LCMV GPC. After 24 h, we used TCS to infect a fresh cell monolayer (2 nd infection) and identified infected cells based on ZsGreen expression. To assess the effect of ouabain on de novo assembly of infectious progeny we determined normalized ratios (2 nd /1 st infection) of ZsGreen + cells (Fig 6F) . The second experiment involved infection (MOI = 0.1) of cells with WT LCMV, and 48 h later we washed infected cells three times to remove the extracellular infectious progeny produced during the first 48 h of infection. Then, fresh media containing ouabain or DMSO vehicle control were added, and 24 h later we determined virus titers in TCS (Fig 6G) . Results from both experiments consistently showed that ouabain did not inhibit assembly de novo of extracellular infectious virus.
Combination therapy can significantly alleviate the problem posed by the rapid emergence of drug-resistant variants commonly observed during monotherapy strategies to control RNA virus infections. Since ouabain and rocaglamide inhibited different steps of the LCMV life cycle, we examined whether their use in combination results in a synergistic anti-LCMV effect. For this experiment, we infected A549 cells with rLCMV/eGFP and treated them with ouabain and rocaglamide using different concentrations and combinations. At 48 h pi, we determined percent eGFP expression (Fig 7) . Combination treatment with ouabain and rocaglamide resulted in synergistic anti-LCMV activity that was enhanced under conditions using higher concentrations of ouabain and lower concentrations of rocaglamide.
We next asked whether the ATP1A1 and PHB host-cell factors contributed also to multiplication of viral hemorrhagic fever-causing LASV. We treated A549 cells with ouabain, bufalin, or rocaglamide and inoculated the treated cells with recombinant LASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP). eGFP expression was examined 48 h later. Similar to rLCMV infection, LASV multiplication was restricted in ouabain-, bufalin-, or rocaglamide-treated cells at concentrations minimally impacting cell viability, although their IC 50 values were slightly higher than those found with the LCMV infection system (Fig 5B and S2 Fig) as ouabain had IC 50 of 9.34 nM, bufalin had IC 50 of 1.66 nM and rocaglamide had IC 50 of 37.0 nM (Fig 8) . We also tested the effect of compounds targeting ATP1A1 and PHB on multiplication of JUNV. Consistent with our results obtained with LCMV and LASV, ouabain, bufalin, and rocaglamide strongly suppressed JUNV multiplication (S3 Fig). These findings indicate that ATP1A1 and PHB function as pro-viral factors of a range of mammarenaviruses.
We identified ATP1A1 and PHB as novel host-cell proteins that contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses. Our approach using a recombinant LCMV expressing NP with an affinity tag facilitated defining the NP interactome in the context of LCMV infection. Recently, using an NP-specific monoclonal antibody (mAb) to precipitate NP and associated cellular protein partners in a mammarenavirus NP interactome, King et al. identified 348 host proteins that associated with LCMV NP [45] . We found 99 common proteins between our filtered LCMV NP interactome of 171 proteins and the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. Differences in both experimental conditions and analysis methodologies used to generate the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. and ours likely h post-transfection, cells were washed with fresh media to eliminate Z-mediated production of VLPs in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain or Roc-A at the indicated concentrations. VLPs present in TCS were collected by ultracentrifugation, and cell lysates were prepared. Z protein expression in VLPs and cell lysates were determined by western blots using antibodies to Strep-tag (C) and FLAG-tag (D). Budding efficiency for each sample was estimated by dividing the signal intensity of the Z protein associated with VLPs by that of Z detected in the cell lysate. Numbers on the bottom of panel C correspond to LCMV Z budding efficiencies determined in a representative experiment. Results shown in panel E correspond to the average and SD from four independent experiments including the one shown in panel D. The mean budding efficiency of DMSO treatedsamples was set to 100%. Data represent mean ± SD of four independent experiments. (F) Effect of ouabain on incorporation of viral glycoprotein into virions. 293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with scrLCMV/ZsG (1 st infection) for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were washed with fresh medium to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain at 40 nM (OUA). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayer of BHK-21 cells (2 nd infection) seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. ZsGreen signal intensity was measured by a fluorescent plate reader. GP-incorporation efficiency was estimated by dividing ZsGreen signal intensity in BHK-21 cell lysate (2 nd ) by that in 293T cell lysate (1 st ). The mean GP-incorporation efficiency of DMSO treated samples was set to 100%. Data represent means ± SD from three independent experiments. contributed to the observed differences between data sets. Despite progress in the implementation of global proteomics-based screens to identify virus-host protein-protein interactions, overlap between datasets for the same viral system is usually limited. However, the substantial overlap of 99 of the 171 NP-interacting proteins from both studies supports the overall reliability of both systems. We used results of the eGFP-Strep interactome, determined in r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, as a control to filter out non-specific NP interactions, which may have resulted in a higher degree of stringency than in the study by King et al for selection of NP-interacting candidates. The combined information provided by the NP interactome reported by King et al. and the one we present in this work, will facilitate future studies to further characterize the functional and biological implications of NP-host cell interacting proteins.
All tested mammarenavirus NPs, with exception of the NP from TCRV, blocked IRF-3-dependent IFN-I induction [25, 46] . The anti-IFN activity of NP was mapped to its C-terminal part and linked to the 3'-5' exonuclease domain present with the NP C-terminal part [30] . Inhibitor-B kinase ε (IKKε) was identified as an NP-binding protein using plasmid-mediated overexpression in transfected cells [47] , and the NP-IKKε binding affinity correlated with NP's ability to inhibit IFN-I induction [47] . We, as well as the work by King et al. [45] , did not detect this NP-IKKε interaction. This discrepancy may have been caused by very low expression of IKKε in LCMV-infected cells, which prevented detection of IKKε by LC-MS/MS. Alternatively, NP-IKKε interaction could possibility be temporarily regulated and take place at early times pi, but could be mostly absent at 48 h pi, the time at which we prepared the cell lysates for our proteomics studies. Future studies comparing the NP interactome at different times during infection will contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics of NP/hostcell protein interactions.
Na + /K + -ATPase is a well-characterized membrane ion transporter and is composed of two functional subunits (α and β) and one regulatory γ subunit [48] . ATP1A1 represents one of four α subunits [49, 50] . Recent evidence has suggested that the Na + /K + -ATPase is involved in multiple cell signaling pathways that are independent of its ion-pumping function [51] . Cardiac glycoside inhibitors of the Na + /K + -ATPase (NKA), so-called cardiotonic steroids (CST; e.g., ouabain, bufalin), have been shown to inhibit multiplication of different viruses including Ebola virus [35], coronaviruses [36], herpes simplex virus 1 [52, 53] , CHIKV [54] , human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) [55] , adenovirus [56] and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 1 [57] .
Different mechanisms are likely to contribute to the antiviral activity of CSTs, including altered cell functions modulated by the signaling activity of Na + /K + -ATPase [58] . Thus, a low concentration of ouabain induces a conformational change in ATP1A1 that results in activation and release of proto-oncogene tyrosine protein kinase, Src, from ATP1A1, followed by activation of as yet unknown downstream signaling that inhibits, for instance, cell entry of murine hepatitis virus (MHV) [59] . However, our results indicated that ouabain did not interfere with LCMV cell entry. In addition, treatment with the Src inhibitor 4-amino-5-(4-methylphenyl)-7-(t-butyl)pyrazolo [3,4-d] pyrimidine (PP1) did not counteract the anti-LCMV activity of ouabain (S4 Fig). Nevertheless, ATP1A1-mediated Src signaling could plausibly contribute to the inhibitory effect of ouabain on JUNV multiplication as similarly to that observed with MHV. Moreover, cell entry of JUNV occurs also by clathrin-mediated endocytosis [60] , a process affected by Src signaling. Ouabain has been clinically used in several European countries for the management of congestive heart failure, whereas bufalin has been tested in clinical trials for cancer treatments [61] , and the CST digoxin has been FDA-approved since 1997 to treat heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Hence, opportunities for the repurposing CSTs have potential as therapeutics to treat infections caused by viral hemorrhagic fever-causing arenaviruses.
The PHB inhibitor, rocaglamide, appeared to interfere with LCMV RNA synthesis and budding, but did not affect LCMV cell entry. In contrast, PHB was reported to be a cell entry receptor for DENV-2 [39] and CHIKV [40] . On the other hand, PHB did not act as a virus cell entry receptor for HCV. Rather, PHB contributed to HCV cell entry through binding to cellular RAF (c-Raf; proto-oncogene serine/threonine-protein kinase) and subsequent Harvey rat sarcoma proto-oncogene (HRas) activation that induces a signal transduction pathway required for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mediated HCV cell entry [37] . In addition, siRNA-mediated kd of PHB decreased production of H5N1 FLUAV [38] . These findings indicate that PHB is involved in different steps of the life cycle of a variety of viruses, and thereby an attractive target for the development of broad-spectrum antiviral drugs.
Rocaglate is a group of natural compounds, which includes rocaglamide, that inhibits protein synthesis by targeting the ATP-dependent DEAD-box RNA helicase eukaryotic initiation factor 4A (eIF4A) and exerts anti-tumor activity [62, 63] . The rocaglate compound, silvestrol, inhibits Ebola virus multiplication likely by interfering with the role of eIF4A in viral protein translation [64] .
While we focused on two host proteins, ATP1A1 and PHB, in this study, our proteomics approach also identified several NP-interacting host-cell proteins whose kd expression via siRNA resulted in increased LCMV multiplication. These proteins, which included MAP1B, might have anti-LCMV activity. MAP1B has been shown to bind to nonstructural proteins 1 (NS1) and 2 (NS2) of human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) [34] . NS1 and NS2 of HRSV antagonizes host IFN-I response by reducing the levels of TNF receptor associated factor (TRAF3), IKKε (NS1), and STAT2 (NS2) [65] . NS2-MAP1B interaction interfered with HRSV NS2's ability to reduce levels of STAT2, whereas the role of NS1-MAP1B interaction remains to be determined [34] . Examining the role of NP-MAP1B interaction in modulating NP's ability to inhibit induction of type I IFN is of interest.
We identified among the NP-interacting host cell proteins the RNA helicase Moloney leukemia virus 10 (MOV10), which has been reported to be an antiviral factor for FLUAV [66] , retroviruses [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] , and DENV-2 [72] . We did not observe increased LCMV multiplication in cells subjected to siRNA-mediated kd of MOV10, a finding that would question an anti-LCMV activity of MOV10. However, we consider that LCMV has already optimal multiplication in A549 cells and further increases may occur only under rather unique conditions. MOV10 was shown to enhance IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction following SeV infection through a tank binding kinase 1 (TBK1)-independent and IKKε-dependent manner. This finding was further supported by demonstrating MOV10-IKKε interaction by co-immunoprecipitation studies [73] . We documented that the anti-IFN activity of mammarenavirus NP correlated with its ability to interact with IKKε [47] . Whether NP-MOV10 interaction prevents MOV10 from enhancing IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction remains to be determined.
Several members of the mammalian chaperonin-containing T-complex (CCT) were identified as prominent hits in our NP interactome. The mammalian CCT is critical for folding of many proteins with important functions in diverse cellular processes [74] , and may protect complex protein topologies within its central cavity during biosynthesis and folding [75] . The contribution of CCT members to NP assembly into a nucleocapsid structure could account for their presence in the NP, but not eGFP, interactome. Interestingly, members of the CCT have been implicated in multiplication of different viruses including rabies virus [76, 77] , HCV [78] and FLUAV [79] . However, the role of these CCT proteins in virus multiplication remains unknown and may involve functions other than acting as molecular chaperones.
Previous studies documented the presence of several components of the of eIF4F, including 4A, within viral replication-transcription complexes (RTC) detected in cells infected with LCMV [80] and TCRV [81] . These findings, together with the detection of a number of ribosomal proteins in the NP interactome, suggest that translation of viral mRNAs may take place within RTC. However, rocaglamide interference with the activity of eIF4A within the viral RTC might contribute to its anti-LCMV activity.
In this work, we documented the generation of rLCMV/Strep-NP and its use to define the NP-interactome in infected cells. We presented evidence that ATP1A1 and PHB contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses using genetics and pharmacological inhibition of the genes. Consistent with our findings, bioinformatic analysis revealed that the protein network associated with ATP1A1 and PHB involves host cell proteins with functions in biological processes that have been implicated in virus multiplication (S5 Fig). The overall experimental approach described here can facilitate the identification of biologically relevant NP-interacting host-cell proteins. Future studies elucidating the roles of pro-and antiviral host-cell factors identified in this study in mammarenavirus multiplication will advance our understanding of the multiple functions of NP and uncover novel cellular targets for the development of antimammarenaviral drugs. In addition, by identifying proviral host-cell factors, drugs that are already approved can be repurposing as therapeutics to combat human pathogenic mammarenavirus infections.
Baby hamster kidney BHK-21 (American Type Culture Collection, ATCC, CCL-10), house mouse L929 (ATCC CCL-1), grivet Vero E6 (ATCC CRL-1586), human A549 (ATCC CCL-185), and human HEK 293T (ATCC CRL-3216) cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) containing 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, 2 mM of L-glutamine, 100 mg/ml of streptomycin, and 100 U/ml of penicillin at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 .
WT recombinant LCMVs, Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and clone-13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains, were generated as described [30, 82, 83] . Generation of rLCMV/NP(D382A) and SeV, strain Cantell, was described [30, 82, 83 ]. An rLCMV lacking GPC and expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) was generated by reverse genetics using procedures previously described [84] . rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep were generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate WT rLCMV and tri-segmented LCMV (r3LCMV) expressing eGFP [30] . For the generation of these novel rLCMVs, we created pol1S Cl-13 plasmids that directed Pol1-mediated intracellular synthesis of recombinant LCMV S genome RNA species coding for Strep-tagged NP or eGFP, respectively (Fig 1A and 1B) . The rLCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMV/eGFP) was generated as described [85] , and the rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (rLCMV/ZsG) instead of eGFP was generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMV/eGFP. Generation of rLASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP) will be described elsewhere. A tri-segmented recombinant live-attenuated Candid #1 strain of JUNV expressing eGFP (r3JUNV/eGFP) was generated as described [86] . For the generation of a novel single cycle rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP), a pol1S plasmid was created by omitting GPC open reading frame (ORF) from pol1S plasmid used for the generation of rLCMV/ZsG. scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP was rescued by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP [84] .
LCMV titers were determined by immunofocus forming assay (IFFA) as described [87] . Briefly, 10-fold serial virus dilutions were used to infect Vero E6 cell monolayers in a 96-well plate, and at 20 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). After cell permeabilization by treatment with dilution buffer (DB) (0.3% Triton X-100 in PBS-containing 3% bovine serum albumin [BSA]), cells were stained with a rat mAb to NP (VL-4, Bio X Cell, West Lebanon, NH) conjugated with Alexa Fluor 488 (VL-4-AF488, Protein Labeling Kit, Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA). VSV titers were determined by a plaque assay.
Total cell lysates were prepared in PD lysis buffer (+) (250 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% TritonX-100, 10% glycerol, 1 mM of MgCl 2 , 1 μM of CaCl 2 , 1 μM of ZnCl 2 ) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Clarified lysates were mixed at a 1:1 ratio with loading buffer (100 mM of Tris [pH 6.8], 20% 2-mercaptoethanol, 4% SDS, 0.2% bromophenol blue, 20% glycerol) and boiled for 5 min. Proteins samples were fractionated by SDS-PAGE using 4-20% gradient polyacrylamide gels (Mini-PROTEAN TGX gels 4-20%, Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA), and proteins were transferred by electroblotting onto polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Immobilin Transfer Membranes, Millipore, Billerica, MA). To detect Strep-tagged proteins, membranes were reacted with mouse monoclonal antibodies to Strep (QIAGEN, Germantown, MD), eGFP (Takara Bio USA, Mountain View, CA), GP 2 (We33/ 36), ATP1A1 (TehrmoFisher Scientific, Rockford, IL), PHB (Abcam, Cambridge, MA) or rabbit polyclonal antibodies to α-tubulin (Cell Signaling Technologies, Danvers, MA) or glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH, Millipore), respectively, followed by incubation with appropriate horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse or anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, West Grove, PA). SuperSignal West Pico or Femto chemiluminescent substrate (Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used to elicit chemiluminescent signals that were visualized using ImageQuant LAS 4000 Imager (GE Healthcare Bio-Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA).
Pull down of strep-tagged proteins from infected cell lysate. A549 cells prepared in six 15-cm dishes (approximately 1.0 x 10 8 cells in total) were infected with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP at an MOI of 0.1. At 48 h pi, cells were washed three times with ice-cold PBS, scraped into fresh ice-cold PBS, and centrifuged at 400 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Supernatant was removed, and cells were lysed with 12 ml of PD lysis buffer (+) supplemented with halt protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktail (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and 5 μg/ml of deoxyribonuclease I (Worthington Biochemical Corporation, Lakewood, NJ). Lysate was clarified by centrifugation at 3,900 x g at 4˚C for 30 min to remove cell debris. Clarified cell lysate was then incubated with strep-tactin sepharose resin (QIAGEN) at 4˚C. After 2 h of incubation, the resin was washed three times with PD lysis buffer (+) and once with PD lysis buffer without TritonX-100 (PD lysis buffer [-] ). After the centrifugation at 1,600 x g and 4˚C for 5 min, the last wash buffer was removed, and protein complexes associated with the resin were eluted into 2 ml of PD lysis buffer (-) containing 2.5 mM of desthiobiotin. The eluate was then subjected to TCA precipitation followed by trypsin digestion.
Multidimensional protein identification technology microcolumn. A MudPIT microcolumn was prepared by first creating a Kasil frit at one end of an un-deactivated 250-μm outside diameter (OD) capillary tube (interior diameter of 360 μm)(Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA). The Kasil frit was prepared by briefly dipping a 20-30-cm capillary tube in 300 μl of Kasil 1624 potassium silicate well-mixed solution (PQ Corporation, Malvern, PA) and 100 μl of formamide, curing at 100˚C for 4 h, and cutting the frit to a length of %2 mm. Strong cation exchange particles (SCX Luna, 5-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) were packed in-house from particle slurries in methanol to 2.5 cm. Reversed phase particles (2 cm, C18 Aqua, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were then successively packed onto the capillary tube using the same method as SCX loading.
MudPIT analysis. An analytical reversed-phase liquid chromatography column was generated by pulling a 100-μm (interior diameter (ID) of 360 μm) OD capillary tube (Polymicro Technologies, Phoenix, AZ) to 5-μm ID tip. Reversed-phase particles (Luna C18, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were packed directly into the pulled column at 5.5 mPa until 15 cm long. The column was further packed, washed, and equilibrated at 10 mPa with buffer B (80% acetonitrile, 0.1% formic acid) followed by buffer A (5% acetonitrile and 0.1% formic acid). MudPIT and analytical columns were assembled using a zero-dead volume union (Upchurch Scientific, Oak Harbor, WA). LC-MS/MS analysis was performed with an Agilent high-pressure LC pump (Agilent) and linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap Orbitrap Velos (Thermo) using an in-house built electrospray stage. Electrospray was performed directly from the analytical column by applying the electrospray ionization (ESI) voltage at a tee (150 μm ID, Upchurch Scientific) directly downstream of a 1:1,000 split flow to reduce the flow rate to 300 nl/min through the columns. MudPIT experiments (10-step) were performed in which each step corresponds to 0, 10, 20, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 , and 100% buffer C (500 mM of ammonium acetate, 0.1% formic acid, and 5% acetonitrile) and was run for 3 min at the beginning of a 110-min gradient.
Data analysis. Protein and peptide identification were performed with Integrated Proteomics Pipeline-IP2 (Integrated Proteomics Applications, San Diego, CA. http://www. integratedproteomics.com/) using ProLuCID and DTASelect2 algorithms. DTASelect parameters were-p 2 -y 1-trypstat-pfp .01 -extra-pI-DB-dm-in. Spectrum raw files were extracted into ms2 files from raw files using open source RawExtract 1.9.9 (Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA; http://fields.scripps.edu/downloads.php), and the tandem mass spectra were searched against a human protein database (UniprotKB). To accurately estimate peptide probabilities and false discovery rates, we used a decoy database containing the reversed sequences of all the proteins appended to the target database. Tandem mass spectra were matched to sequences using the ProLuCID algorithm with a 600-ppm peptide mass tolerance. ProLuCID searches were done on an Intel Xeon cluster processor running under the Linux operating system. The search space included half and fully tryptic peptide candidates that fell within the mass tolerance window with no miscleavage constraint. Carbamidomethylation (+57.02146 Da) of cysteine was considered as a static modification. siRNA screening A549 cells (1,000 cells/well) in a 384-well plate were reverse transfected with 0.5 pmol of siRNA pool (S2 Table) targeting each gene using 0.1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (Thermo Fisher Scientific) (final siRNA concentration was 10 nM), followed by incubation at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 . At 72 h post-transfection, cells were infected (MOI = 0.05) with rLCMV/ZsG. siRNA target host-cell proteins were selected based on availability of validated siRNA sequences. The siRNAs we used to examine the effects on LCMV multiplication of knockdown expression of NP-interacting host cell protein candidate hits corresponded to the Genome-wide ON TAR-GET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene; Dharmacon, Lafayette, CO).
A549 cells (3.0 x 10 4 cells/well) were reverse transfected in a 24-well plate with 6 pmol of siRNA pools targeting each gene using 1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (final siRNA concentration is 10 nM). At 72 h post-transfection, total cell lysate was prepared in modified lysis A buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl [pH = 8.0], 50 mM NaCl, 1%Triton X-100, 1.25% sodium deoxycholate) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. The total protein concentration of clarified cell lysate was measured by Pierce BCA Protein Assay Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The same amount of protein from each sample was subjected to SDS-PAGE, and the protein expression of siRNA-targeted genes was analyzed by western blots.
Cells infected with eGFP-or ZsGreen-expressing rLCMV were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. After cell permeabilization by treatment with DB, cells were stained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). Green fluorescence (eGFP or ZsGreen) and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, Bio-Tek, Winooski, VT).
Mock-and virus-infected cells were fixed with 4% PFA. After cell permeabilization and blocking by treatment with DB containing 1% normal goat serum, cells were incubated with primary mouse anti ATP1A1 or PHB antibody followed by secondary anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluore 568 (anti-mouse IgG-AF568). Subsequently, cells were stained with VL-4-AF488. In some samples, primary antibody against ATP1A1 or PHB was omitted to determine background fluorescence. To visualize nuclei, DAPI Fluoromount-G (SouthernBiotech, Birmingham, AL) was used to mount coverslips on a slide glass. Stained cells were observed under a confocal microscope (LSM 710, Zeiss) and data analyzed by ZEN software (Zeiss). Co-localization analysis was performed on a pixel by pixel basis using Zen software (Zeiss). Eight green (NP-positive) cells were marked and every pixel in the marked area was plotted in the scatter diagram based on its intensity level from each channel. Thresholds for green and red channels were determined using mock-infected cells stained with VL-4-AF488 (anti-NP) and anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluor 568, without using anti-ATP1A1 or -PHB antibodies. Each pixel was assigned a value of 1. Co-localization coefficients (CC) (or non-weighted CC) were determined by dividing the sum of both green-and red-positive pixels by the sum of green positive pixels. This calculation was repeated for eight individual cells. To assess the specificity of co-localization, we determined weighted CC by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal. Comparison of non-weighted and weighted CC allowed us to determine whether brighter pixels were present in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions. p values were determined by a two-tailed paired t test using GraphPad Prism software.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 2 h, followed by infection with rLCMV/eGFP (MOI = 0.01). Compounds were present to study endpoint. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS, and eGFP expression was examined by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated and rLCMV/eGFP-infected cells were set to 100%. The IC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded in a 96-well plate (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions and cultured at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 48 h. Then, CellTiter 96 AQ ueous one solution reagent (Promega, Madison, WI) was added. Thereafter, the assay was performed according to the manufacturer's recommendations, and the absorbance (490 nm) was obtained using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) reader (SPECTRA max plus 384; Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated cells were set to 100%. The CC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A plasmid expressing C-terminus Strep-tagged Z protein (pC-LCMV-Z-Strep) was generated using similar procedure to generate a plasmid expressing C-terminus FLAG-tagged LASV Z protein (pC-LASV-Z-FLAG), and the budding assay was performed as previously described [88] . Cells (HEK 293T) in a 12-well plate were transfected with 0.5 μg of empty pCAGGS vector or pC-LCMV-Z-Strep or pC-LASV-Z-FLAG using Lipofectamine 2000. At 5 h post-transfection, media were replaced with fresh media and incubated at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 19 h. Then the cells were three times washed with fresh medium. After the removal of the last wash medium, cells were cultured in fresh medium containing ouabain (30 or 40 nM) or rocaglamide (50 or 100 nM) or equivalent concentration of DMSO, and 24 h later, virion-like particle (VLP)-containing TCS and cells were collected. Total cell lysate was prepared by lysing the cells with lysis buffer (1% NP-40, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 62.5 mM NaCl, 0.4% sodium deoxycholate). After clarification of TCS from cell debris by centrifugation at 400 x g and 4˚C for 10 min, VLPs were collected by ultracentrifugation at 100,000 x g and 4˚C for 30 min through a 20% sucrose cushion. VLPs were resuspended in PBS, and Z expression in total cell lysate and TCS (containing VLPs) were analyzed by western blots.
A549 cells infected with rLCMV/eGFP were harvested using Accutase cell detachment solution (Innovative Cell Technologies, San Diego, CA) and fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. eGFP expression was examined by flow cytometry using a BD LSR II (Becton Dickson), and data were analyzed with FlowJo (Tree Star, Inc., Ashland, OR).
293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected with scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were three times washed with fresh media to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of 40 nM of ouabain or vehicle control (DMSO). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayers of BHK-21 cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. Total cell lysate was prepared in cell lysis buffer (150 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% [NP-40], 1 mM of EDTA] and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. ZsGreen signal intensity in clarified cell lysate was measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek).
A549 cells seeded (2 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with combinations of different concentrations of ouabain and rocaglamide for 2 h and then infected (MOI = 0.01) with rLCMV/eGFP. Compounds were present in the culture medium throughout the experiment. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed, permeabilized by treatment with DB, and stained with DAPI. eGFP and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). eGFP readouts were normalized by DAPI readouts, and normalized data were used to analyze synergistic effect of the two compounds by the MacSynergy II program [89] .
Data were analyzed for p values by a two-tailed unpaired t test using GraphPad Prism software. | How are Mammarenaviruses spread from rodents to humans? | 5,149 | mucosal exposure to aerosols or by direct contact of abraded skin with infectious material | 2,592 |
1,687 | Interactome analysis of the lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus nucleoprotein in infected cells reveals ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit Alpha 1 and prohibitin as host-cell factors involved in the life cycle of mammarenaviruses
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834214/
SHA: efbd0dfc426da5dd25ce29411d6fa37571623773
Authors: Iwasaki, Masaharu; Minder, Petra; Caì, Yíngyún; Kuhn, Jens H.; Yates, John R.; Torbett, Bruce E.; de la Torre, Juan C.
Date: 2018-02-20
DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892
License: cc0
Abstract: Several mammalian arenaviruses (mammarenaviruses) cause hemorrhagic fevers in humans and pose serious public health concerns in their endemic regions. Additionally, mounting evidence indicates that the worldwide-distributed, prototypic mammarenavirus, lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance. Concerns about human-pathogenic mammarenaviruses are exacerbated by of the lack of licensed vaccines, and current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to off-label use of ribavirin that is only partially effective. Detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions may facilitate the development of novel anti-mammarenavirus strategies by targeting components of the host-cell machinery that are required for efficient virus multiplication. Here we document the generation of a recombinant LCMV encoding a nucleoprotein (NP) containing an affinity tag (rLCMV/Strep-NP) and its use to capture the NP-interactome in infected cells. Our proteomic approach combined with genetics and pharmacological validation assays identified ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit alpha 1 (ATP1A1) and prohibitin (PHB) as pro-viral factors. Cell-based assays revealed that ATP1A1 and PHB are involved in different steps of the virus life cycle. Accordingly, we observed a synergistic inhibitory effect on LCMV multiplication with a combination of ATP1A1 and PHB inhibitors. We show that ATP1A1 inhibitors suppress multiplication of Lassa virus and Candid#1, a live-attenuated vaccine strain of Junín virus, suggesting that the requirement of ATP1A1 in virus multiplication is conserved among genetically distantly related mammarenaviruses. Our findings suggest that clinically approved inhibitors of ATP1A1, like digoxin, could be repurposed to treat infections by mammarenaviruses pathogenic for humans.
Text: Introduction Mammarenaviruses (Arenaviridae: Mammarenavirus) cause chronic infections of rodents worldwide [1] . Invasion of human dwellings by infected rodents can result in human infections through mucosal exposure to aerosols or by direct contact of abraded skin with infectious material. Several mammarenaviruses cause viral hemorrhagic fevers (VHFs) in humans and pose important public health problems in their endemic areas [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] . Mammarenaviruses are classified into two main groups, Old World (OW) and New World (NW) [1] . The OW Lassa virus (LASV), causative agent of Lassa fever (LF), is the most significant OW mammarenaviral pathogen. LASV is estimated to infect several hundred thousand individuals annually in Western Africa, resulting in a high number of LF cases associated with high morbidity and lethality. Moreover, LASV endemic regions are expanding [7] , and the association of the recently identified mammarenavirus Lujo virus with a VHF outbreak in Southern Africa [8, 9] has raised concerns about the emergence of novel VHF-causing mammarenaviruses. The most significant NW mammarenavirus is Junín virus (JUNV), which causes Argentinian hemorrhagic fever [10] . The worldwide-distributed OW mammarenavirus lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance especially in congenital infections [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] . Moreover, LCMV poses a particular threat to immunocompromised individuals, as has been illustrated by fatal cases of LCMV infection associated with organ transplants [16, 17] . However, LCMV research can be safely performed at BSL-2 containment, rather than the BSL-4 containment necessary for live LASV or JUNV research [18] .
No US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-licensed vaccines are available for the treatment of arenavirus infections, although a live attenuated vaccine strain of JUNV, Candid#1, is licensed in Argentina. Likewise, current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to an offlabel use of the nucleoside analogue ribavirin that is only partially effective and can cause significant side effects [19] [20] [21] . Development of effective anti-mammarenavirus drugs has been hampered by the lack of detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions required for mammarenavirus multiplication that could represent amenable targets for antiviral therapy. the potential problem that overexpression of a single viral gene product may potentiate PPI interactions that are not relevant during the course of a natural virus infection. To overcome this issue, we designed a recombinant LCMV (rLCMV) encoding a tandem [WSHPQFEK (GGGS) 3 WSHPQFEK] Strep-tag fused to the amino-terminus of NP (rLCMV/Strep-NP) (Fig 1A and 1B) . To facilitate the identification of specific PPI between NP and host cell proteins, we used our mammarenavirus tri-segmented (r3) platform [30] to design an r3LCMV expressing a C-terminus Strep-tag version of enhanced green fluorescent protein (r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep) that we used as a negative control (Fig 1A and 1B) . We rescued rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep and confirmed the expression of strep-tagged NP and eGFP in rLCMV/ Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, respectively (Fig 1C) . Next, we examined the growth properties of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep in three different cells lines from hamsters, humans, and nonhuman primates (BHK-21, A549, and Vero E6 cells, respectively) (Fig 1D) . The fitness of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep was modestly decreased compared to that observed with wild-type (WT) Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and Clone 13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains of LCMV. However, both rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep had WT-like growth kinetics and reached high titers. As with WT LCMV, infection with rLCMV/Strep-NP prevented production of bioactive IFN-I by cells in response to Sendai virus (SeV) infection as determined using an IFN bioassay based on protection against the cytopathic effect (CPE) induced by infection with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) (Fig 1E) . Vero cells treated for 16 h with tissue cultured supernatants (TCS) from A549 cells infected first with WT LCMV or rLCMV/Strep, followed by 24 h infection with SeV, remained fully susceptible to VSV-induced CPE. In contrast, Vero cells treated with TCS from A549 cells infected with rLCMV/NP(D382A), a mutant unable to prevent induction of IFN-I [30] , and subsequently with SeV, were protected against VSV induced CPE.
We selected the human A549 cell line because lung epithelial cells are one of the initial cell targets of humans following inhalation of mammarenavirions. We infected A549 cells (multiplicity of infection [MOI] = 0.1) with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep (Fig 2A) . At 48 h post-inoculation (pi), we prepared total cell lysates for pull-down (PD) assays using a sepharose resin coated with strep-tactin. Aliquots of the protein complexes present in the PD samples were fractionated by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) (Fig 2B) followed by SYPRO Ruby protein gel staining. We compared the pattern of stained protein bands detected between rLCMV/Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strepinfected samples and confirmed the presence of Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep in pertinent samples (Fig 2B) . Protein complexes in the rest of eluates from the PD samples were concentrated by trichloroacetic acid (TCA) precipitation and subjected to trypsin digestion (Fig 2A) . Digested peptides were subjected to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) analysis using a hybrid mass spectrometer consisting of linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap (LTQ) Velos and an Orbitrap analyser.
We classified host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS analysis from two independent biological replicates into two groups: 1) proteins found only in Strep-NP PD samples with at least five spectral counts ( Table 1) , and 2) proteins found in both Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep PD samples with five or higher spectral counts in Strep-NP samples and at least 2-fold higher spectral counts in Strep-NP PD compared to eGFP PD samples ( Table 2) . Filtering the data using these criteria resulted in identification of 139 candidate host-cell proteins as NP-interacting partners. Among 53 proteins found present in both NP-and eGFP-PD samples, 36 had spectral counts in the NP-PD sample that were less than two-fold higher than their corresponding spectral counts in the eGFP-PD sample (Fig 2C and S1 Table) . Based on the criteria we described above, we considered these proteins to be highly unlikely specific NPinteractors with an involvement in the LCMV life cycle, and therefore we did not consider these hits for further analysis. However, we acknowledge that we cannot formally rule out that some of these hits could still play a role on the life cycle of LCMV.
The protein annotation through evolutionary relationship (PANTHER) protein family classification (Biological Process) of the NP-interacting protein candidates revealed that a large number of proteins were involved in metabolic and cellular processes (Fig 2D) . We also analyzed the molecular functions of the NP-interacting protein candidates according to the PAN-THER protein profile classification (Fig 2E) , which revealed diversified biochemical functions enriched for nucleic acid-binding proteins and chaperones.
To initially assess pro-or anti-viral roles of NP-interacting host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS, we examined the effect of small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated knockdown (kd) of each of the corresponding genes on multiplication of rLCMV expressing reporter gene ZsGreen (ZsG) in A549 cells (Fig 3A) . The siRNAs we used were from the genome-wide ON TARGET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene). OTPs are latest generation of siRNAs and offer significant advantages over previous generations. Off-target effects are primarily driven by antisense strand microRNA (miR)-like seed activity. In OTPs, the sense strand is modified to favor antisense strand uptake whereas the antisense strand seed region is modified to drastically reduce seed-related off-targeting [33] . In addition, OTPs are designed on the foundation of the SMARTselection algorithm (Dharmacon), widely considered to be the best algorithm for rational siRNA design strategy. Numerous host-cell factors showed an anti-LCMV effect (increased ZsG expression by kd of the genes), including microtubule-associated protein 1B (MAP1B) [ [38] , dengue virus 2 (DENV-2) [39] , and chikungunya virus (CHIKV) [40] .
To begin assessing the potential biological implications of the identified NP-host cell protein interactions, we selected ATP1A1 and PHB given the availability of reagents, existing knowledge about their roles in cell physiology, and evidence of participation in multiplication of other viruses. We confirmed that cells transfected with siRNA specific to ATP1A1 and PHB exhibited the predicted reduced levels in ATP1A1 and PHB protein expression (Fig 3B) . Likewise, we examined whether siRNA-mediated reduced expression levels of ZsGreen correlated with reduced LCMV progeny titers. For this, we transfected A549 cells with siRNA targeting Expression of Strep-tagged proteins. A549 cells seeded (5.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 6-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMVs. At 48 h pi, total cell lysates were prepared, and protein expression was analyzed by western blotting. (D) Growth properties of rLCMV expressing Strep-tagged proteins. BHK-21 (1.75 x 10 5 cells/well), A549 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well), or Vero E6 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well) cells seeded in 24-well plates and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.01) with the indicated rLCMVs. At the indicated times pi, TCSs were collected and virus titers determined by IFFA. Results represent means ± SD of the results of three independent experiments. (E) Lack of induction of IFN-I in cells infected with rLCMV/Strep-NP. A549 cells were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMV or mock-infected, and 36 h later infected with SeV (MOI = 1). At 24 h pi with SeV, TCS were collected and used, following virus inactivation by U.V., to treat Vero E6 cells for 16 h, followed by infection with rVSV (MOI = 0.1) [rVSV(+)] or mockinfection [rVSV (-) ]. At 24 h pi with rVSV, cells were fixed with 4% PFA and stained with crystal violet to assess rVSV-induced cytopathic effect. We used as control rLCMV/NP(D382A) that contains mutation D382A within NP, which has been shown to abrogate the NP's ability to counteract the induction of IFN-I production.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892.g001 ATP1A1 or with NC siRNA 72 h prior to infection with rLCMV/ZsG. We found that siRNAmediated kd of ATP1A1 dramatically inhibited ZsGreen expression (Fig 3Ci) , which was associated with a significant reduction of infectious LCMV progeny (Fig 3Cii) . Our attempts to see interaction between NP and ATP1A1 or NP and PHB by co-immunoprecipitation were unsuccessful. Several possibilities could account for this, including interactions of low affinity or high on/off rate or both. Another consideration is that only a minor fraction of NP might be engaged in the interaction with a given host cell protein, and therefore, detection of these interactions would require highly sensitive methods such as LC-MS/MS. To overcome this problem we used confocal microscopy to examine the co-localization of NP with ATP1A1 and PHB in LCMV-infected cells. Weighted co-localization coefficients (CC), determined by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal, were significantly higher than non-weighted CC, indicating the presence of brighter pixels in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions (Fig 4) .
The cardiac glycoside ouabain is an inhibitor of ATP1A1 that has been used to treat congestive heart failure in European countries [41] . The PHB inhibitor rocaglamide is a flavagline from an Aglaia tree used in traditional Chinese medicine [42] that has potent anticancer activity [43] . To examine whether pharmacological inhibition of ATP1A1 or PHB inhibited LCMV multiplication, we pretreated human (A549 and HEK 293T), nonhuman primate (Vero E6), and rodent (murine L929 and hamster BHK-21) cells with ouabain or rocaglamide and infected them with rLCMV/eGFP (S1 Fig). Ouabain treatment resulted in a strong dosedependent inhibition of eGFP expression in infected human-and nonhuman primate cells, but did not affect eGFP expression intensity in infected rodent cells (S1A Fig) . This finding is consistent with rodents expressing an ATP1A1 allele that is resistant to ouabain inhibition [44] .
Likewise, we observed a dose-dependent rocaglamide inhibition of eGFP expression in all cell lines infected with rLCMV/eGFP (S1B Fig) . Consistent with these findings, production of infectious LCMV progeny was reduced by treatment with either ouabain or rocaglamide ( Fig 5A) within a concentration range that had minimal impact on cell viability (Fig 5B) . To examine the correlation between efficacy and cytotoxicity of these compounds, we determined their therapeutic index (TI = CC 50 /IC 50 (Fig 5Bi) ; whereas rocaglamide had TIs of >105 (CC 50 > 1000 nM, IC 50 = 9.51 nM) and 10.3 (CC 50 = 100 nM, IC 50 = 9.75 nM) in A549 and Vero E6 cells, respectively (Fig 5Bii) . Moreover, the ATP1A1 antagonist inhibitor, bufalin, also exhibited robust anti-LCMV activity with TIs of 8.92 (CC 50 Heat shock protein HSP 90-alpha HSP90AA1 P07900 8 10 9
Endoplasmin HSP90B1 P14625 9 9 9
Large neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1 SLC7A5 Q01650 6 12 9
Keratin, type II cuticular Hb1 KRT81 Q14533 10 8 9
Putative helicase MOV-10 MOV10 Q9HCE1 8 10 9
Microtubule-associated protein 1B MAP1B P46821 6 11 8.5
Spectrin beta chain, rocaglamide (100 nM) (Fig 5C) , further supporting a specific anti-LCMV activity of ouabain and rocaglamide that was not due to reduced cell viability.
To gain insights about the mechanisms by which ouabain and rocaglamide exert their anti-LCMV activity, we examined effects of these compounds on distinct steps of the LCMV life cycle. First, we asked whether ouabain and rocaglamide affected cell entry of LCMV. We conducted time-of-addition experiments in which we treated cells with ouabain or rocaglamide prior to virus inoculation (-1.5 h), at the time of inoculation (0 h), or 1.5 h pi (+1.5 h) (Fig 6A) .
In some samples, we used ammonium chloride starting at 4 h pi to block multiple rounds of virus infection. The timing of compound addition did not significantly change the number of eGFP-positive cells, indicating that neither ouabain nor rocaglamide inhibited cell entry of LCMV. The number of eGFP + cells in ouabain-treated cells was reduced at all time-of-addition points compared to vehicle dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-treated cells, but was similar to that observed in ammonium chloride-treated cells. Thus, ouabain did not inhibit LCMV RNA replication and gene expression, but rather a late step of the LCMV life cycle. In contrast, rocaglamide treatment resulted in a negligible number of eGFP + cells, indicating that rocaglamide inhibited virus RNA replication and gene transcription.
To further investigate the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis, we infected A549 cells with a recombinant single-cycle infectious LCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) and treated cells with either ouabain or rocaglamide. Seventy-two hours later, we determined percent normalized eGFP expression in infected cells (Fig 6B) . Consistent with our results from the time-of-addition experiment, ouabain did not affect reporter eGFP expression. However, rocaglamide reduced eGFP expression, confirming inhibitory effect of rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis.
We also examined the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on the late step of the arenavirus life cycle, Z-mediated budding. For this experiment, we transfected cells with Z-Strep-and Z-FLAG (DYKDDDDK epitope)-expressing plasmids from LCMV and LASV, respectively. At 24 h post-transfection, we removed the tissue culture supernatant (TCS) and washed extensively transfected cells to eliminate already budded Z. We cultured the transfected cells in the presence or absence of ouabain or rocaglamide. At 24 h, we determined by WB levels of Z protein in both whole cell lysates and associated with virus-like particles (VLPs) collected from TCS. Treatment with rocaglamide, but not with ouabain, caused a reduction in both LCMV and LASV Z budding efficiency (Fig 6C and 6D) . The reproducibility of these findings was confirmed based on results from four independent experiments (Fig 6E) . We also examined whether ouabain could interfere with a step of assembly of infectious progeny that was not captured by the Z budding assay through two additional experiments. The first experiment involved the use of a newly generated single-cycle infectious recombinant LCMV expressing the reporter gene ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP) to infect (MOI = 0.1) A549 cells (1 st infection). These cells were subsequently transfected with a plasmid expressing LCMV GPC. After 24 h, we used TCS to infect a fresh cell monolayer (2 nd infection) and identified infected cells based on ZsGreen expression. To assess the effect of ouabain on de novo assembly of infectious progeny we determined normalized ratios (2 nd /1 st infection) of ZsGreen + cells (Fig 6F) . The second experiment involved infection (MOI = 0.1) of cells with WT LCMV, and 48 h later we washed infected cells three times to remove the extracellular infectious progeny produced during the first 48 h of infection. Then, fresh media containing ouabain or DMSO vehicle control were added, and 24 h later we determined virus titers in TCS (Fig 6G) . Results from both experiments consistently showed that ouabain did not inhibit assembly de novo of extracellular infectious virus.
Combination therapy can significantly alleviate the problem posed by the rapid emergence of drug-resistant variants commonly observed during monotherapy strategies to control RNA virus infections. Since ouabain and rocaglamide inhibited different steps of the LCMV life cycle, we examined whether their use in combination results in a synergistic anti-LCMV effect. For this experiment, we infected A549 cells with rLCMV/eGFP and treated them with ouabain and rocaglamide using different concentrations and combinations. At 48 h pi, we determined percent eGFP expression (Fig 7) . Combination treatment with ouabain and rocaglamide resulted in synergistic anti-LCMV activity that was enhanced under conditions using higher concentrations of ouabain and lower concentrations of rocaglamide.
We next asked whether the ATP1A1 and PHB host-cell factors contributed also to multiplication of viral hemorrhagic fever-causing LASV. We treated A549 cells with ouabain, bufalin, or rocaglamide and inoculated the treated cells with recombinant LASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP). eGFP expression was examined 48 h later. Similar to rLCMV infection, LASV multiplication was restricted in ouabain-, bufalin-, or rocaglamide-treated cells at concentrations minimally impacting cell viability, although their IC 50 values were slightly higher than those found with the LCMV infection system (Fig 5B and S2 Fig) as ouabain had IC 50 of 9.34 nM, bufalin had IC 50 of 1.66 nM and rocaglamide had IC 50 of 37.0 nM (Fig 8) . We also tested the effect of compounds targeting ATP1A1 and PHB on multiplication of JUNV. Consistent with our results obtained with LCMV and LASV, ouabain, bufalin, and rocaglamide strongly suppressed JUNV multiplication (S3 Fig). These findings indicate that ATP1A1 and PHB function as pro-viral factors of a range of mammarenaviruses.
We identified ATP1A1 and PHB as novel host-cell proteins that contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses. Our approach using a recombinant LCMV expressing NP with an affinity tag facilitated defining the NP interactome in the context of LCMV infection. Recently, using an NP-specific monoclonal antibody (mAb) to precipitate NP and associated cellular protein partners in a mammarenavirus NP interactome, King et al. identified 348 host proteins that associated with LCMV NP [45] . We found 99 common proteins between our filtered LCMV NP interactome of 171 proteins and the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. Differences in both experimental conditions and analysis methodologies used to generate the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. and ours likely h post-transfection, cells were washed with fresh media to eliminate Z-mediated production of VLPs in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain or Roc-A at the indicated concentrations. VLPs present in TCS were collected by ultracentrifugation, and cell lysates were prepared. Z protein expression in VLPs and cell lysates were determined by western blots using antibodies to Strep-tag (C) and FLAG-tag (D). Budding efficiency for each sample was estimated by dividing the signal intensity of the Z protein associated with VLPs by that of Z detected in the cell lysate. Numbers on the bottom of panel C correspond to LCMV Z budding efficiencies determined in a representative experiment. Results shown in panel E correspond to the average and SD from four independent experiments including the one shown in panel D. The mean budding efficiency of DMSO treatedsamples was set to 100%. Data represent mean ± SD of four independent experiments. (F) Effect of ouabain on incorporation of viral glycoprotein into virions. 293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with scrLCMV/ZsG (1 st infection) for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were washed with fresh medium to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain at 40 nM (OUA). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayer of BHK-21 cells (2 nd infection) seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. ZsGreen signal intensity was measured by a fluorescent plate reader. GP-incorporation efficiency was estimated by dividing ZsGreen signal intensity in BHK-21 cell lysate (2 nd ) by that in 293T cell lysate (1 st ). The mean GP-incorporation efficiency of DMSO treated samples was set to 100%. Data represent means ± SD from three independent experiments. contributed to the observed differences between data sets. Despite progress in the implementation of global proteomics-based screens to identify virus-host protein-protein interactions, overlap between datasets for the same viral system is usually limited. However, the substantial overlap of 99 of the 171 NP-interacting proteins from both studies supports the overall reliability of both systems. We used results of the eGFP-Strep interactome, determined in r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, as a control to filter out non-specific NP interactions, which may have resulted in a higher degree of stringency than in the study by King et al for selection of NP-interacting candidates. The combined information provided by the NP interactome reported by King et al. and the one we present in this work, will facilitate future studies to further characterize the functional and biological implications of NP-host cell interacting proteins.
All tested mammarenavirus NPs, with exception of the NP from TCRV, blocked IRF-3-dependent IFN-I induction [25, 46] . The anti-IFN activity of NP was mapped to its C-terminal part and linked to the 3'-5' exonuclease domain present with the NP C-terminal part [30] . Inhibitor-B kinase ε (IKKε) was identified as an NP-binding protein using plasmid-mediated overexpression in transfected cells [47] , and the NP-IKKε binding affinity correlated with NP's ability to inhibit IFN-I induction [47] . We, as well as the work by King et al. [45] , did not detect this NP-IKKε interaction. This discrepancy may have been caused by very low expression of IKKε in LCMV-infected cells, which prevented detection of IKKε by LC-MS/MS. Alternatively, NP-IKKε interaction could possibility be temporarily regulated and take place at early times pi, but could be mostly absent at 48 h pi, the time at which we prepared the cell lysates for our proteomics studies. Future studies comparing the NP interactome at different times during infection will contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics of NP/hostcell protein interactions.
Na + /K + -ATPase is a well-characterized membrane ion transporter and is composed of two functional subunits (α and β) and one regulatory γ subunit [48] . ATP1A1 represents one of four α subunits [49, 50] . Recent evidence has suggested that the Na + /K + -ATPase is involved in multiple cell signaling pathways that are independent of its ion-pumping function [51] . Cardiac glycoside inhibitors of the Na + /K + -ATPase (NKA), so-called cardiotonic steroids (CST; e.g., ouabain, bufalin), have been shown to inhibit multiplication of different viruses including Ebola virus [35], coronaviruses [36], herpes simplex virus 1 [52, 53] , CHIKV [54] , human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) [55] , adenovirus [56] and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 1 [57] .
Different mechanisms are likely to contribute to the antiviral activity of CSTs, including altered cell functions modulated by the signaling activity of Na + /K + -ATPase [58] . Thus, a low concentration of ouabain induces a conformational change in ATP1A1 that results in activation and release of proto-oncogene tyrosine protein kinase, Src, from ATP1A1, followed by activation of as yet unknown downstream signaling that inhibits, for instance, cell entry of murine hepatitis virus (MHV) [59] . However, our results indicated that ouabain did not interfere with LCMV cell entry. In addition, treatment with the Src inhibitor 4-amino-5-(4-methylphenyl)-7-(t-butyl)pyrazolo [3,4-d] pyrimidine (PP1) did not counteract the anti-LCMV activity of ouabain (S4 Fig). Nevertheless, ATP1A1-mediated Src signaling could plausibly contribute to the inhibitory effect of ouabain on JUNV multiplication as similarly to that observed with MHV. Moreover, cell entry of JUNV occurs also by clathrin-mediated endocytosis [60] , a process affected by Src signaling. Ouabain has been clinically used in several European countries for the management of congestive heart failure, whereas bufalin has been tested in clinical trials for cancer treatments [61] , and the CST digoxin has been FDA-approved since 1997 to treat heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Hence, opportunities for the repurposing CSTs have potential as therapeutics to treat infections caused by viral hemorrhagic fever-causing arenaviruses.
The PHB inhibitor, rocaglamide, appeared to interfere with LCMV RNA synthesis and budding, but did not affect LCMV cell entry. In contrast, PHB was reported to be a cell entry receptor for DENV-2 [39] and CHIKV [40] . On the other hand, PHB did not act as a virus cell entry receptor for HCV. Rather, PHB contributed to HCV cell entry through binding to cellular RAF (c-Raf; proto-oncogene serine/threonine-protein kinase) and subsequent Harvey rat sarcoma proto-oncogene (HRas) activation that induces a signal transduction pathway required for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mediated HCV cell entry [37] . In addition, siRNA-mediated kd of PHB decreased production of H5N1 FLUAV [38] . These findings indicate that PHB is involved in different steps of the life cycle of a variety of viruses, and thereby an attractive target for the development of broad-spectrum antiviral drugs.
Rocaglate is a group of natural compounds, which includes rocaglamide, that inhibits protein synthesis by targeting the ATP-dependent DEAD-box RNA helicase eukaryotic initiation factor 4A (eIF4A) and exerts anti-tumor activity [62, 63] . The rocaglate compound, silvestrol, inhibits Ebola virus multiplication likely by interfering with the role of eIF4A in viral protein translation [64] .
While we focused on two host proteins, ATP1A1 and PHB, in this study, our proteomics approach also identified several NP-interacting host-cell proteins whose kd expression via siRNA resulted in increased LCMV multiplication. These proteins, which included MAP1B, might have anti-LCMV activity. MAP1B has been shown to bind to nonstructural proteins 1 (NS1) and 2 (NS2) of human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) [34] . NS1 and NS2 of HRSV antagonizes host IFN-I response by reducing the levels of TNF receptor associated factor (TRAF3), IKKε (NS1), and STAT2 (NS2) [65] . NS2-MAP1B interaction interfered with HRSV NS2's ability to reduce levels of STAT2, whereas the role of NS1-MAP1B interaction remains to be determined [34] . Examining the role of NP-MAP1B interaction in modulating NP's ability to inhibit induction of type I IFN is of interest.
We identified among the NP-interacting host cell proteins the RNA helicase Moloney leukemia virus 10 (MOV10), which has been reported to be an antiviral factor for FLUAV [66] , retroviruses [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] , and DENV-2 [72] . We did not observe increased LCMV multiplication in cells subjected to siRNA-mediated kd of MOV10, a finding that would question an anti-LCMV activity of MOV10. However, we consider that LCMV has already optimal multiplication in A549 cells and further increases may occur only under rather unique conditions. MOV10 was shown to enhance IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction following SeV infection through a tank binding kinase 1 (TBK1)-independent and IKKε-dependent manner. This finding was further supported by demonstrating MOV10-IKKε interaction by co-immunoprecipitation studies [73] . We documented that the anti-IFN activity of mammarenavirus NP correlated with its ability to interact with IKKε [47] . Whether NP-MOV10 interaction prevents MOV10 from enhancing IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction remains to be determined.
Several members of the mammalian chaperonin-containing T-complex (CCT) were identified as prominent hits in our NP interactome. The mammalian CCT is critical for folding of many proteins with important functions in diverse cellular processes [74] , and may protect complex protein topologies within its central cavity during biosynthesis and folding [75] . The contribution of CCT members to NP assembly into a nucleocapsid structure could account for their presence in the NP, but not eGFP, interactome. Interestingly, members of the CCT have been implicated in multiplication of different viruses including rabies virus [76, 77] , HCV [78] and FLUAV [79] . However, the role of these CCT proteins in virus multiplication remains unknown and may involve functions other than acting as molecular chaperones.
Previous studies documented the presence of several components of the of eIF4F, including 4A, within viral replication-transcription complexes (RTC) detected in cells infected with LCMV [80] and TCRV [81] . These findings, together with the detection of a number of ribosomal proteins in the NP interactome, suggest that translation of viral mRNAs may take place within RTC. However, rocaglamide interference with the activity of eIF4A within the viral RTC might contribute to its anti-LCMV activity.
In this work, we documented the generation of rLCMV/Strep-NP and its use to define the NP-interactome in infected cells. We presented evidence that ATP1A1 and PHB contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses using genetics and pharmacological inhibition of the genes. Consistent with our findings, bioinformatic analysis revealed that the protein network associated with ATP1A1 and PHB involves host cell proteins with functions in biological processes that have been implicated in virus multiplication (S5 Fig). The overall experimental approach described here can facilitate the identification of biologically relevant NP-interacting host-cell proteins. Future studies elucidating the roles of pro-and antiviral host-cell factors identified in this study in mammarenavirus multiplication will advance our understanding of the multiple functions of NP and uncover novel cellular targets for the development of antimammarenaviral drugs. In addition, by identifying proviral host-cell factors, drugs that are already approved can be repurposing as therapeutics to combat human pathogenic mammarenavirus infections.
Baby hamster kidney BHK-21 (American Type Culture Collection, ATCC, CCL-10), house mouse L929 (ATCC CCL-1), grivet Vero E6 (ATCC CRL-1586), human A549 (ATCC CCL-185), and human HEK 293T (ATCC CRL-3216) cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) containing 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, 2 mM of L-glutamine, 100 mg/ml of streptomycin, and 100 U/ml of penicillin at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 .
WT recombinant LCMVs, Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and clone-13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains, were generated as described [30, 82, 83] . Generation of rLCMV/NP(D382A) and SeV, strain Cantell, was described [30, 82, 83 ]. An rLCMV lacking GPC and expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) was generated by reverse genetics using procedures previously described [84] . rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep were generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate WT rLCMV and tri-segmented LCMV (r3LCMV) expressing eGFP [30] . For the generation of these novel rLCMVs, we created pol1S Cl-13 plasmids that directed Pol1-mediated intracellular synthesis of recombinant LCMV S genome RNA species coding for Strep-tagged NP or eGFP, respectively (Fig 1A and 1B) . The rLCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMV/eGFP) was generated as described [85] , and the rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (rLCMV/ZsG) instead of eGFP was generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMV/eGFP. Generation of rLASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP) will be described elsewhere. A tri-segmented recombinant live-attenuated Candid #1 strain of JUNV expressing eGFP (r3JUNV/eGFP) was generated as described [86] . For the generation of a novel single cycle rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP), a pol1S plasmid was created by omitting GPC open reading frame (ORF) from pol1S plasmid used for the generation of rLCMV/ZsG. scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP was rescued by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP [84] .
LCMV titers were determined by immunofocus forming assay (IFFA) as described [87] . Briefly, 10-fold serial virus dilutions were used to infect Vero E6 cell monolayers in a 96-well plate, and at 20 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). After cell permeabilization by treatment with dilution buffer (DB) (0.3% Triton X-100 in PBS-containing 3% bovine serum albumin [BSA]), cells were stained with a rat mAb to NP (VL-4, Bio X Cell, West Lebanon, NH) conjugated with Alexa Fluor 488 (VL-4-AF488, Protein Labeling Kit, Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA). VSV titers were determined by a plaque assay.
Total cell lysates were prepared in PD lysis buffer (+) (250 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% TritonX-100, 10% glycerol, 1 mM of MgCl 2 , 1 μM of CaCl 2 , 1 μM of ZnCl 2 ) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Clarified lysates were mixed at a 1:1 ratio with loading buffer (100 mM of Tris [pH 6.8], 20% 2-mercaptoethanol, 4% SDS, 0.2% bromophenol blue, 20% glycerol) and boiled for 5 min. Proteins samples were fractionated by SDS-PAGE using 4-20% gradient polyacrylamide gels (Mini-PROTEAN TGX gels 4-20%, Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA), and proteins were transferred by electroblotting onto polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Immobilin Transfer Membranes, Millipore, Billerica, MA). To detect Strep-tagged proteins, membranes were reacted with mouse monoclonal antibodies to Strep (QIAGEN, Germantown, MD), eGFP (Takara Bio USA, Mountain View, CA), GP 2 (We33/ 36), ATP1A1 (TehrmoFisher Scientific, Rockford, IL), PHB (Abcam, Cambridge, MA) or rabbit polyclonal antibodies to α-tubulin (Cell Signaling Technologies, Danvers, MA) or glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH, Millipore), respectively, followed by incubation with appropriate horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse or anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, West Grove, PA). SuperSignal West Pico or Femto chemiluminescent substrate (Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used to elicit chemiluminescent signals that were visualized using ImageQuant LAS 4000 Imager (GE Healthcare Bio-Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA).
Pull down of strep-tagged proteins from infected cell lysate. A549 cells prepared in six 15-cm dishes (approximately 1.0 x 10 8 cells in total) were infected with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP at an MOI of 0.1. At 48 h pi, cells were washed three times with ice-cold PBS, scraped into fresh ice-cold PBS, and centrifuged at 400 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Supernatant was removed, and cells were lysed with 12 ml of PD lysis buffer (+) supplemented with halt protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktail (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and 5 μg/ml of deoxyribonuclease I (Worthington Biochemical Corporation, Lakewood, NJ). Lysate was clarified by centrifugation at 3,900 x g at 4˚C for 30 min to remove cell debris. Clarified cell lysate was then incubated with strep-tactin sepharose resin (QIAGEN) at 4˚C. After 2 h of incubation, the resin was washed three times with PD lysis buffer (+) and once with PD lysis buffer without TritonX-100 (PD lysis buffer [-] ). After the centrifugation at 1,600 x g and 4˚C for 5 min, the last wash buffer was removed, and protein complexes associated with the resin were eluted into 2 ml of PD lysis buffer (-) containing 2.5 mM of desthiobiotin. The eluate was then subjected to TCA precipitation followed by trypsin digestion.
Multidimensional protein identification technology microcolumn. A MudPIT microcolumn was prepared by first creating a Kasil frit at one end of an un-deactivated 250-μm outside diameter (OD) capillary tube (interior diameter of 360 μm)(Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA). The Kasil frit was prepared by briefly dipping a 20-30-cm capillary tube in 300 μl of Kasil 1624 potassium silicate well-mixed solution (PQ Corporation, Malvern, PA) and 100 μl of formamide, curing at 100˚C for 4 h, and cutting the frit to a length of %2 mm. Strong cation exchange particles (SCX Luna, 5-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) were packed in-house from particle slurries in methanol to 2.5 cm. Reversed phase particles (2 cm, C18 Aqua, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were then successively packed onto the capillary tube using the same method as SCX loading.
MudPIT analysis. An analytical reversed-phase liquid chromatography column was generated by pulling a 100-μm (interior diameter (ID) of 360 μm) OD capillary tube (Polymicro Technologies, Phoenix, AZ) to 5-μm ID tip. Reversed-phase particles (Luna C18, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were packed directly into the pulled column at 5.5 mPa until 15 cm long. The column was further packed, washed, and equilibrated at 10 mPa with buffer B (80% acetonitrile, 0.1% formic acid) followed by buffer A (5% acetonitrile and 0.1% formic acid). MudPIT and analytical columns were assembled using a zero-dead volume union (Upchurch Scientific, Oak Harbor, WA). LC-MS/MS analysis was performed with an Agilent high-pressure LC pump (Agilent) and linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap Orbitrap Velos (Thermo) using an in-house built electrospray stage. Electrospray was performed directly from the analytical column by applying the electrospray ionization (ESI) voltage at a tee (150 μm ID, Upchurch Scientific) directly downstream of a 1:1,000 split flow to reduce the flow rate to 300 nl/min through the columns. MudPIT experiments (10-step) were performed in which each step corresponds to 0, 10, 20, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 , and 100% buffer C (500 mM of ammonium acetate, 0.1% formic acid, and 5% acetonitrile) and was run for 3 min at the beginning of a 110-min gradient.
Data analysis. Protein and peptide identification were performed with Integrated Proteomics Pipeline-IP2 (Integrated Proteomics Applications, San Diego, CA. http://www. integratedproteomics.com/) using ProLuCID and DTASelect2 algorithms. DTASelect parameters were-p 2 -y 1-trypstat-pfp .01 -extra-pI-DB-dm-in. Spectrum raw files were extracted into ms2 files from raw files using open source RawExtract 1.9.9 (Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA; http://fields.scripps.edu/downloads.php), and the tandem mass spectra were searched against a human protein database (UniprotKB). To accurately estimate peptide probabilities and false discovery rates, we used a decoy database containing the reversed sequences of all the proteins appended to the target database. Tandem mass spectra were matched to sequences using the ProLuCID algorithm with a 600-ppm peptide mass tolerance. ProLuCID searches were done on an Intel Xeon cluster processor running under the Linux operating system. The search space included half and fully tryptic peptide candidates that fell within the mass tolerance window with no miscleavage constraint. Carbamidomethylation (+57.02146 Da) of cysteine was considered as a static modification. siRNA screening A549 cells (1,000 cells/well) in a 384-well plate were reverse transfected with 0.5 pmol of siRNA pool (S2 Table) targeting each gene using 0.1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (Thermo Fisher Scientific) (final siRNA concentration was 10 nM), followed by incubation at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 . At 72 h post-transfection, cells were infected (MOI = 0.05) with rLCMV/ZsG. siRNA target host-cell proteins were selected based on availability of validated siRNA sequences. The siRNAs we used to examine the effects on LCMV multiplication of knockdown expression of NP-interacting host cell protein candidate hits corresponded to the Genome-wide ON TAR-GET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene; Dharmacon, Lafayette, CO).
A549 cells (3.0 x 10 4 cells/well) were reverse transfected in a 24-well plate with 6 pmol of siRNA pools targeting each gene using 1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (final siRNA concentration is 10 nM). At 72 h post-transfection, total cell lysate was prepared in modified lysis A buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl [pH = 8.0], 50 mM NaCl, 1%Triton X-100, 1.25% sodium deoxycholate) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. The total protein concentration of clarified cell lysate was measured by Pierce BCA Protein Assay Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The same amount of protein from each sample was subjected to SDS-PAGE, and the protein expression of siRNA-targeted genes was analyzed by western blots.
Cells infected with eGFP-or ZsGreen-expressing rLCMV were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. After cell permeabilization by treatment with DB, cells were stained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). Green fluorescence (eGFP or ZsGreen) and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, Bio-Tek, Winooski, VT).
Mock-and virus-infected cells were fixed with 4% PFA. After cell permeabilization and blocking by treatment with DB containing 1% normal goat serum, cells were incubated with primary mouse anti ATP1A1 or PHB antibody followed by secondary anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluore 568 (anti-mouse IgG-AF568). Subsequently, cells were stained with VL-4-AF488. In some samples, primary antibody against ATP1A1 or PHB was omitted to determine background fluorescence. To visualize nuclei, DAPI Fluoromount-G (SouthernBiotech, Birmingham, AL) was used to mount coverslips on a slide glass. Stained cells were observed under a confocal microscope (LSM 710, Zeiss) and data analyzed by ZEN software (Zeiss). Co-localization analysis was performed on a pixel by pixel basis using Zen software (Zeiss). Eight green (NP-positive) cells were marked and every pixel in the marked area was plotted in the scatter diagram based on its intensity level from each channel. Thresholds for green and red channels were determined using mock-infected cells stained with VL-4-AF488 (anti-NP) and anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluor 568, without using anti-ATP1A1 or -PHB antibodies. Each pixel was assigned a value of 1. Co-localization coefficients (CC) (or non-weighted CC) were determined by dividing the sum of both green-and red-positive pixels by the sum of green positive pixels. This calculation was repeated for eight individual cells. To assess the specificity of co-localization, we determined weighted CC by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal. Comparison of non-weighted and weighted CC allowed us to determine whether brighter pixels were present in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions. p values were determined by a two-tailed paired t test using GraphPad Prism software.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 2 h, followed by infection with rLCMV/eGFP (MOI = 0.01). Compounds were present to study endpoint. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS, and eGFP expression was examined by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated and rLCMV/eGFP-infected cells were set to 100%. The IC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded in a 96-well plate (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions and cultured at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 48 h. Then, CellTiter 96 AQ ueous one solution reagent (Promega, Madison, WI) was added. Thereafter, the assay was performed according to the manufacturer's recommendations, and the absorbance (490 nm) was obtained using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) reader (SPECTRA max plus 384; Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated cells were set to 100%. The CC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A plasmid expressing C-terminus Strep-tagged Z protein (pC-LCMV-Z-Strep) was generated using similar procedure to generate a plasmid expressing C-terminus FLAG-tagged LASV Z protein (pC-LASV-Z-FLAG), and the budding assay was performed as previously described [88] . Cells (HEK 293T) in a 12-well plate were transfected with 0.5 μg of empty pCAGGS vector or pC-LCMV-Z-Strep or pC-LASV-Z-FLAG using Lipofectamine 2000. At 5 h post-transfection, media were replaced with fresh media and incubated at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 19 h. Then the cells were three times washed with fresh medium. After the removal of the last wash medium, cells were cultured in fresh medium containing ouabain (30 or 40 nM) or rocaglamide (50 or 100 nM) or equivalent concentration of DMSO, and 24 h later, virion-like particle (VLP)-containing TCS and cells were collected. Total cell lysate was prepared by lysing the cells with lysis buffer (1% NP-40, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 62.5 mM NaCl, 0.4% sodium deoxycholate). After clarification of TCS from cell debris by centrifugation at 400 x g and 4˚C for 10 min, VLPs were collected by ultracentrifugation at 100,000 x g and 4˚C for 30 min through a 20% sucrose cushion. VLPs were resuspended in PBS, and Z expression in total cell lysate and TCS (containing VLPs) were analyzed by western blots.
A549 cells infected with rLCMV/eGFP were harvested using Accutase cell detachment solution (Innovative Cell Technologies, San Diego, CA) and fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. eGFP expression was examined by flow cytometry using a BD LSR II (Becton Dickson), and data were analyzed with FlowJo (Tree Star, Inc., Ashland, OR).
293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected with scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were three times washed with fresh media to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of 40 nM of ouabain or vehicle control (DMSO). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayers of BHK-21 cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. Total cell lysate was prepared in cell lysis buffer (150 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% [NP-40], 1 mM of EDTA] and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. ZsGreen signal intensity in clarified cell lysate was measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek).
A549 cells seeded (2 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with combinations of different concentrations of ouabain and rocaglamide for 2 h and then infected (MOI = 0.01) with rLCMV/eGFP. Compounds were present in the culture medium throughout the experiment. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed, permeabilized by treatment with DB, and stained with DAPI. eGFP and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). eGFP readouts were normalized by DAPI readouts, and normalized data were used to analyze synergistic effect of the two compounds by the MacSynergy II program [89] .
Data were analyzed for p values by a two-tailed unpaired t test using GraphPad Prism software. | What are the main groups for Mammarenaviruses? | 5,150 | Old World (OW) and New World (NW) | 2,898 |
1,687 | Interactome analysis of the lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus nucleoprotein in infected cells reveals ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit Alpha 1 and prohibitin as host-cell factors involved in the life cycle of mammarenaviruses
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834214/
SHA: efbd0dfc426da5dd25ce29411d6fa37571623773
Authors: Iwasaki, Masaharu; Minder, Petra; Caì, Yíngyún; Kuhn, Jens H.; Yates, John R.; Torbett, Bruce E.; de la Torre, Juan C.
Date: 2018-02-20
DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892
License: cc0
Abstract: Several mammalian arenaviruses (mammarenaviruses) cause hemorrhagic fevers in humans and pose serious public health concerns in their endemic regions. Additionally, mounting evidence indicates that the worldwide-distributed, prototypic mammarenavirus, lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance. Concerns about human-pathogenic mammarenaviruses are exacerbated by of the lack of licensed vaccines, and current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to off-label use of ribavirin that is only partially effective. Detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions may facilitate the development of novel anti-mammarenavirus strategies by targeting components of the host-cell machinery that are required for efficient virus multiplication. Here we document the generation of a recombinant LCMV encoding a nucleoprotein (NP) containing an affinity tag (rLCMV/Strep-NP) and its use to capture the NP-interactome in infected cells. Our proteomic approach combined with genetics and pharmacological validation assays identified ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit alpha 1 (ATP1A1) and prohibitin (PHB) as pro-viral factors. Cell-based assays revealed that ATP1A1 and PHB are involved in different steps of the virus life cycle. Accordingly, we observed a synergistic inhibitory effect on LCMV multiplication with a combination of ATP1A1 and PHB inhibitors. We show that ATP1A1 inhibitors suppress multiplication of Lassa virus and Candid#1, a live-attenuated vaccine strain of Junín virus, suggesting that the requirement of ATP1A1 in virus multiplication is conserved among genetically distantly related mammarenaviruses. Our findings suggest that clinically approved inhibitors of ATP1A1, like digoxin, could be repurposed to treat infections by mammarenaviruses pathogenic for humans.
Text: Introduction Mammarenaviruses (Arenaviridae: Mammarenavirus) cause chronic infections of rodents worldwide [1] . Invasion of human dwellings by infected rodents can result in human infections through mucosal exposure to aerosols or by direct contact of abraded skin with infectious material. Several mammarenaviruses cause viral hemorrhagic fevers (VHFs) in humans and pose important public health problems in their endemic areas [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] . Mammarenaviruses are classified into two main groups, Old World (OW) and New World (NW) [1] . The OW Lassa virus (LASV), causative agent of Lassa fever (LF), is the most significant OW mammarenaviral pathogen. LASV is estimated to infect several hundred thousand individuals annually in Western Africa, resulting in a high number of LF cases associated with high morbidity and lethality. Moreover, LASV endemic regions are expanding [7] , and the association of the recently identified mammarenavirus Lujo virus with a VHF outbreak in Southern Africa [8, 9] has raised concerns about the emergence of novel VHF-causing mammarenaviruses. The most significant NW mammarenavirus is Junín virus (JUNV), which causes Argentinian hemorrhagic fever [10] . The worldwide-distributed OW mammarenavirus lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance especially in congenital infections [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] . Moreover, LCMV poses a particular threat to immunocompromised individuals, as has been illustrated by fatal cases of LCMV infection associated with organ transplants [16, 17] . However, LCMV research can be safely performed at BSL-2 containment, rather than the BSL-4 containment necessary for live LASV or JUNV research [18] .
No US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-licensed vaccines are available for the treatment of arenavirus infections, although a live attenuated vaccine strain of JUNV, Candid#1, is licensed in Argentina. Likewise, current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to an offlabel use of the nucleoside analogue ribavirin that is only partially effective and can cause significant side effects [19] [20] [21] . Development of effective anti-mammarenavirus drugs has been hampered by the lack of detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions required for mammarenavirus multiplication that could represent amenable targets for antiviral therapy. the potential problem that overexpression of a single viral gene product may potentiate PPI interactions that are not relevant during the course of a natural virus infection. To overcome this issue, we designed a recombinant LCMV (rLCMV) encoding a tandem [WSHPQFEK (GGGS) 3 WSHPQFEK] Strep-tag fused to the amino-terminus of NP (rLCMV/Strep-NP) (Fig 1A and 1B) . To facilitate the identification of specific PPI between NP and host cell proteins, we used our mammarenavirus tri-segmented (r3) platform [30] to design an r3LCMV expressing a C-terminus Strep-tag version of enhanced green fluorescent protein (r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep) that we used as a negative control (Fig 1A and 1B) . We rescued rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep and confirmed the expression of strep-tagged NP and eGFP in rLCMV/ Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, respectively (Fig 1C) . Next, we examined the growth properties of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep in three different cells lines from hamsters, humans, and nonhuman primates (BHK-21, A549, and Vero E6 cells, respectively) (Fig 1D) . The fitness of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep was modestly decreased compared to that observed with wild-type (WT) Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and Clone 13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains of LCMV. However, both rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep had WT-like growth kinetics and reached high titers. As with WT LCMV, infection with rLCMV/Strep-NP prevented production of bioactive IFN-I by cells in response to Sendai virus (SeV) infection as determined using an IFN bioassay based on protection against the cytopathic effect (CPE) induced by infection with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) (Fig 1E) . Vero cells treated for 16 h with tissue cultured supernatants (TCS) from A549 cells infected first with WT LCMV or rLCMV/Strep, followed by 24 h infection with SeV, remained fully susceptible to VSV-induced CPE. In contrast, Vero cells treated with TCS from A549 cells infected with rLCMV/NP(D382A), a mutant unable to prevent induction of IFN-I [30] , and subsequently with SeV, were protected against VSV induced CPE.
We selected the human A549 cell line because lung epithelial cells are one of the initial cell targets of humans following inhalation of mammarenavirions. We infected A549 cells (multiplicity of infection [MOI] = 0.1) with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep (Fig 2A) . At 48 h post-inoculation (pi), we prepared total cell lysates for pull-down (PD) assays using a sepharose resin coated with strep-tactin. Aliquots of the protein complexes present in the PD samples were fractionated by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) (Fig 2B) followed by SYPRO Ruby protein gel staining. We compared the pattern of stained protein bands detected between rLCMV/Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strepinfected samples and confirmed the presence of Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep in pertinent samples (Fig 2B) . Protein complexes in the rest of eluates from the PD samples were concentrated by trichloroacetic acid (TCA) precipitation and subjected to trypsin digestion (Fig 2A) . Digested peptides were subjected to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) analysis using a hybrid mass spectrometer consisting of linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap (LTQ) Velos and an Orbitrap analyser.
We classified host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS analysis from two independent biological replicates into two groups: 1) proteins found only in Strep-NP PD samples with at least five spectral counts ( Table 1) , and 2) proteins found in both Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep PD samples with five or higher spectral counts in Strep-NP samples and at least 2-fold higher spectral counts in Strep-NP PD compared to eGFP PD samples ( Table 2) . Filtering the data using these criteria resulted in identification of 139 candidate host-cell proteins as NP-interacting partners. Among 53 proteins found present in both NP-and eGFP-PD samples, 36 had spectral counts in the NP-PD sample that were less than two-fold higher than their corresponding spectral counts in the eGFP-PD sample (Fig 2C and S1 Table) . Based on the criteria we described above, we considered these proteins to be highly unlikely specific NPinteractors with an involvement in the LCMV life cycle, and therefore we did not consider these hits for further analysis. However, we acknowledge that we cannot formally rule out that some of these hits could still play a role on the life cycle of LCMV.
The protein annotation through evolutionary relationship (PANTHER) protein family classification (Biological Process) of the NP-interacting protein candidates revealed that a large number of proteins were involved in metabolic and cellular processes (Fig 2D) . We also analyzed the molecular functions of the NP-interacting protein candidates according to the PAN-THER protein profile classification (Fig 2E) , which revealed diversified biochemical functions enriched for nucleic acid-binding proteins and chaperones.
To initially assess pro-or anti-viral roles of NP-interacting host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS, we examined the effect of small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated knockdown (kd) of each of the corresponding genes on multiplication of rLCMV expressing reporter gene ZsGreen (ZsG) in A549 cells (Fig 3A) . The siRNAs we used were from the genome-wide ON TARGET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene). OTPs are latest generation of siRNAs and offer significant advantages over previous generations. Off-target effects are primarily driven by antisense strand microRNA (miR)-like seed activity. In OTPs, the sense strand is modified to favor antisense strand uptake whereas the antisense strand seed region is modified to drastically reduce seed-related off-targeting [33] . In addition, OTPs are designed on the foundation of the SMARTselection algorithm (Dharmacon), widely considered to be the best algorithm for rational siRNA design strategy. Numerous host-cell factors showed an anti-LCMV effect (increased ZsG expression by kd of the genes), including microtubule-associated protein 1B (MAP1B) [ [38] , dengue virus 2 (DENV-2) [39] , and chikungunya virus (CHIKV) [40] .
To begin assessing the potential biological implications of the identified NP-host cell protein interactions, we selected ATP1A1 and PHB given the availability of reagents, existing knowledge about their roles in cell physiology, and evidence of participation in multiplication of other viruses. We confirmed that cells transfected with siRNA specific to ATP1A1 and PHB exhibited the predicted reduced levels in ATP1A1 and PHB protein expression (Fig 3B) . Likewise, we examined whether siRNA-mediated reduced expression levels of ZsGreen correlated with reduced LCMV progeny titers. For this, we transfected A549 cells with siRNA targeting Expression of Strep-tagged proteins. A549 cells seeded (5.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 6-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMVs. At 48 h pi, total cell lysates were prepared, and protein expression was analyzed by western blotting. (D) Growth properties of rLCMV expressing Strep-tagged proteins. BHK-21 (1.75 x 10 5 cells/well), A549 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well), or Vero E6 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well) cells seeded in 24-well plates and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.01) with the indicated rLCMVs. At the indicated times pi, TCSs were collected and virus titers determined by IFFA. Results represent means ± SD of the results of three independent experiments. (E) Lack of induction of IFN-I in cells infected with rLCMV/Strep-NP. A549 cells were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMV or mock-infected, and 36 h later infected with SeV (MOI = 1). At 24 h pi with SeV, TCS were collected and used, following virus inactivation by U.V., to treat Vero E6 cells for 16 h, followed by infection with rVSV (MOI = 0.1) [rVSV(+)] or mockinfection [rVSV (-) ]. At 24 h pi with rVSV, cells were fixed with 4% PFA and stained with crystal violet to assess rVSV-induced cytopathic effect. We used as control rLCMV/NP(D382A) that contains mutation D382A within NP, which has been shown to abrogate the NP's ability to counteract the induction of IFN-I production.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892.g001 ATP1A1 or with NC siRNA 72 h prior to infection with rLCMV/ZsG. We found that siRNAmediated kd of ATP1A1 dramatically inhibited ZsGreen expression (Fig 3Ci) , which was associated with a significant reduction of infectious LCMV progeny (Fig 3Cii) . Our attempts to see interaction between NP and ATP1A1 or NP and PHB by co-immunoprecipitation were unsuccessful. Several possibilities could account for this, including interactions of low affinity or high on/off rate or both. Another consideration is that only a minor fraction of NP might be engaged in the interaction with a given host cell protein, and therefore, detection of these interactions would require highly sensitive methods such as LC-MS/MS. To overcome this problem we used confocal microscopy to examine the co-localization of NP with ATP1A1 and PHB in LCMV-infected cells. Weighted co-localization coefficients (CC), determined by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal, were significantly higher than non-weighted CC, indicating the presence of brighter pixels in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions (Fig 4) .
The cardiac glycoside ouabain is an inhibitor of ATP1A1 that has been used to treat congestive heart failure in European countries [41] . The PHB inhibitor rocaglamide is a flavagline from an Aglaia tree used in traditional Chinese medicine [42] that has potent anticancer activity [43] . To examine whether pharmacological inhibition of ATP1A1 or PHB inhibited LCMV multiplication, we pretreated human (A549 and HEK 293T), nonhuman primate (Vero E6), and rodent (murine L929 and hamster BHK-21) cells with ouabain or rocaglamide and infected them with rLCMV/eGFP (S1 Fig). Ouabain treatment resulted in a strong dosedependent inhibition of eGFP expression in infected human-and nonhuman primate cells, but did not affect eGFP expression intensity in infected rodent cells (S1A Fig) . This finding is consistent with rodents expressing an ATP1A1 allele that is resistant to ouabain inhibition [44] .
Likewise, we observed a dose-dependent rocaglamide inhibition of eGFP expression in all cell lines infected with rLCMV/eGFP (S1B Fig) . Consistent with these findings, production of infectious LCMV progeny was reduced by treatment with either ouabain or rocaglamide ( Fig 5A) within a concentration range that had minimal impact on cell viability (Fig 5B) . To examine the correlation between efficacy and cytotoxicity of these compounds, we determined their therapeutic index (TI = CC 50 /IC 50 (Fig 5Bi) ; whereas rocaglamide had TIs of >105 (CC 50 > 1000 nM, IC 50 = 9.51 nM) and 10.3 (CC 50 = 100 nM, IC 50 = 9.75 nM) in A549 and Vero E6 cells, respectively (Fig 5Bii) . Moreover, the ATP1A1 antagonist inhibitor, bufalin, also exhibited robust anti-LCMV activity with TIs of 8.92 (CC 50 Heat shock protein HSP 90-alpha HSP90AA1 P07900 8 10 9
Endoplasmin HSP90B1 P14625 9 9 9
Large neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1 SLC7A5 Q01650 6 12 9
Keratin, type II cuticular Hb1 KRT81 Q14533 10 8 9
Putative helicase MOV-10 MOV10 Q9HCE1 8 10 9
Microtubule-associated protein 1B MAP1B P46821 6 11 8.5
Spectrin beta chain, rocaglamide (100 nM) (Fig 5C) , further supporting a specific anti-LCMV activity of ouabain and rocaglamide that was not due to reduced cell viability.
To gain insights about the mechanisms by which ouabain and rocaglamide exert their anti-LCMV activity, we examined effects of these compounds on distinct steps of the LCMV life cycle. First, we asked whether ouabain and rocaglamide affected cell entry of LCMV. We conducted time-of-addition experiments in which we treated cells with ouabain or rocaglamide prior to virus inoculation (-1.5 h), at the time of inoculation (0 h), or 1.5 h pi (+1.5 h) (Fig 6A) .
In some samples, we used ammonium chloride starting at 4 h pi to block multiple rounds of virus infection. The timing of compound addition did not significantly change the number of eGFP-positive cells, indicating that neither ouabain nor rocaglamide inhibited cell entry of LCMV. The number of eGFP + cells in ouabain-treated cells was reduced at all time-of-addition points compared to vehicle dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-treated cells, but was similar to that observed in ammonium chloride-treated cells. Thus, ouabain did not inhibit LCMV RNA replication and gene expression, but rather a late step of the LCMV life cycle. In contrast, rocaglamide treatment resulted in a negligible number of eGFP + cells, indicating that rocaglamide inhibited virus RNA replication and gene transcription.
To further investigate the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis, we infected A549 cells with a recombinant single-cycle infectious LCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) and treated cells with either ouabain or rocaglamide. Seventy-two hours later, we determined percent normalized eGFP expression in infected cells (Fig 6B) . Consistent with our results from the time-of-addition experiment, ouabain did not affect reporter eGFP expression. However, rocaglamide reduced eGFP expression, confirming inhibitory effect of rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis.
We also examined the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on the late step of the arenavirus life cycle, Z-mediated budding. For this experiment, we transfected cells with Z-Strep-and Z-FLAG (DYKDDDDK epitope)-expressing plasmids from LCMV and LASV, respectively. At 24 h post-transfection, we removed the tissue culture supernatant (TCS) and washed extensively transfected cells to eliminate already budded Z. We cultured the transfected cells in the presence or absence of ouabain or rocaglamide. At 24 h, we determined by WB levels of Z protein in both whole cell lysates and associated with virus-like particles (VLPs) collected from TCS. Treatment with rocaglamide, but not with ouabain, caused a reduction in both LCMV and LASV Z budding efficiency (Fig 6C and 6D) . The reproducibility of these findings was confirmed based on results from four independent experiments (Fig 6E) . We also examined whether ouabain could interfere with a step of assembly of infectious progeny that was not captured by the Z budding assay through two additional experiments. The first experiment involved the use of a newly generated single-cycle infectious recombinant LCMV expressing the reporter gene ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP) to infect (MOI = 0.1) A549 cells (1 st infection). These cells were subsequently transfected with a plasmid expressing LCMV GPC. After 24 h, we used TCS to infect a fresh cell monolayer (2 nd infection) and identified infected cells based on ZsGreen expression. To assess the effect of ouabain on de novo assembly of infectious progeny we determined normalized ratios (2 nd /1 st infection) of ZsGreen + cells (Fig 6F) . The second experiment involved infection (MOI = 0.1) of cells with WT LCMV, and 48 h later we washed infected cells three times to remove the extracellular infectious progeny produced during the first 48 h of infection. Then, fresh media containing ouabain or DMSO vehicle control were added, and 24 h later we determined virus titers in TCS (Fig 6G) . Results from both experiments consistently showed that ouabain did not inhibit assembly de novo of extracellular infectious virus.
Combination therapy can significantly alleviate the problem posed by the rapid emergence of drug-resistant variants commonly observed during monotherapy strategies to control RNA virus infections. Since ouabain and rocaglamide inhibited different steps of the LCMV life cycle, we examined whether their use in combination results in a synergistic anti-LCMV effect. For this experiment, we infected A549 cells with rLCMV/eGFP and treated them with ouabain and rocaglamide using different concentrations and combinations. At 48 h pi, we determined percent eGFP expression (Fig 7) . Combination treatment with ouabain and rocaglamide resulted in synergistic anti-LCMV activity that was enhanced under conditions using higher concentrations of ouabain and lower concentrations of rocaglamide.
We next asked whether the ATP1A1 and PHB host-cell factors contributed also to multiplication of viral hemorrhagic fever-causing LASV. We treated A549 cells with ouabain, bufalin, or rocaglamide and inoculated the treated cells with recombinant LASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP). eGFP expression was examined 48 h later. Similar to rLCMV infection, LASV multiplication was restricted in ouabain-, bufalin-, or rocaglamide-treated cells at concentrations minimally impacting cell viability, although their IC 50 values were slightly higher than those found with the LCMV infection system (Fig 5B and S2 Fig) as ouabain had IC 50 of 9.34 nM, bufalin had IC 50 of 1.66 nM and rocaglamide had IC 50 of 37.0 nM (Fig 8) . We also tested the effect of compounds targeting ATP1A1 and PHB on multiplication of JUNV. Consistent with our results obtained with LCMV and LASV, ouabain, bufalin, and rocaglamide strongly suppressed JUNV multiplication (S3 Fig). These findings indicate that ATP1A1 and PHB function as pro-viral factors of a range of mammarenaviruses.
We identified ATP1A1 and PHB as novel host-cell proteins that contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses. Our approach using a recombinant LCMV expressing NP with an affinity tag facilitated defining the NP interactome in the context of LCMV infection. Recently, using an NP-specific monoclonal antibody (mAb) to precipitate NP and associated cellular protein partners in a mammarenavirus NP interactome, King et al. identified 348 host proteins that associated with LCMV NP [45] . We found 99 common proteins between our filtered LCMV NP interactome of 171 proteins and the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. Differences in both experimental conditions and analysis methodologies used to generate the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. and ours likely h post-transfection, cells were washed with fresh media to eliminate Z-mediated production of VLPs in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain or Roc-A at the indicated concentrations. VLPs present in TCS were collected by ultracentrifugation, and cell lysates were prepared. Z protein expression in VLPs and cell lysates were determined by western blots using antibodies to Strep-tag (C) and FLAG-tag (D). Budding efficiency for each sample was estimated by dividing the signal intensity of the Z protein associated with VLPs by that of Z detected in the cell lysate. Numbers on the bottom of panel C correspond to LCMV Z budding efficiencies determined in a representative experiment. Results shown in panel E correspond to the average and SD from four independent experiments including the one shown in panel D. The mean budding efficiency of DMSO treatedsamples was set to 100%. Data represent mean ± SD of four independent experiments. (F) Effect of ouabain on incorporation of viral glycoprotein into virions. 293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with scrLCMV/ZsG (1 st infection) for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were washed with fresh medium to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain at 40 nM (OUA). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayer of BHK-21 cells (2 nd infection) seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. ZsGreen signal intensity was measured by a fluorescent plate reader. GP-incorporation efficiency was estimated by dividing ZsGreen signal intensity in BHK-21 cell lysate (2 nd ) by that in 293T cell lysate (1 st ). The mean GP-incorporation efficiency of DMSO treated samples was set to 100%. Data represent means ± SD from three independent experiments. contributed to the observed differences between data sets. Despite progress in the implementation of global proteomics-based screens to identify virus-host protein-protein interactions, overlap between datasets for the same viral system is usually limited. However, the substantial overlap of 99 of the 171 NP-interacting proteins from both studies supports the overall reliability of both systems. We used results of the eGFP-Strep interactome, determined in r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, as a control to filter out non-specific NP interactions, which may have resulted in a higher degree of stringency than in the study by King et al for selection of NP-interacting candidates. The combined information provided by the NP interactome reported by King et al. and the one we present in this work, will facilitate future studies to further characterize the functional and biological implications of NP-host cell interacting proteins.
All tested mammarenavirus NPs, with exception of the NP from TCRV, blocked IRF-3-dependent IFN-I induction [25, 46] . The anti-IFN activity of NP was mapped to its C-terminal part and linked to the 3'-5' exonuclease domain present with the NP C-terminal part [30] . Inhibitor-B kinase ε (IKKε) was identified as an NP-binding protein using plasmid-mediated overexpression in transfected cells [47] , and the NP-IKKε binding affinity correlated with NP's ability to inhibit IFN-I induction [47] . We, as well as the work by King et al. [45] , did not detect this NP-IKKε interaction. This discrepancy may have been caused by very low expression of IKKε in LCMV-infected cells, which prevented detection of IKKε by LC-MS/MS. Alternatively, NP-IKKε interaction could possibility be temporarily regulated and take place at early times pi, but could be mostly absent at 48 h pi, the time at which we prepared the cell lysates for our proteomics studies. Future studies comparing the NP interactome at different times during infection will contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics of NP/hostcell protein interactions.
Na + /K + -ATPase is a well-characterized membrane ion transporter and is composed of two functional subunits (α and β) and one regulatory γ subunit [48] . ATP1A1 represents one of four α subunits [49, 50] . Recent evidence has suggested that the Na + /K + -ATPase is involved in multiple cell signaling pathways that are independent of its ion-pumping function [51] . Cardiac glycoside inhibitors of the Na + /K + -ATPase (NKA), so-called cardiotonic steroids (CST; e.g., ouabain, bufalin), have been shown to inhibit multiplication of different viruses including Ebola virus [35], coronaviruses [36], herpes simplex virus 1 [52, 53] , CHIKV [54] , human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) [55] , adenovirus [56] and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 1 [57] .
Different mechanisms are likely to contribute to the antiviral activity of CSTs, including altered cell functions modulated by the signaling activity of Na + /K + -ATPase [58] . Thus, a low concentration of ouabain induces a conformational change in ATP1A1 that results in activation and release of proto-oncogene tyrosine protein kinase, Src, from ATP1A1, followed by activation of as yet unknown downstream signaling that inhibits, for instance, cell entry of murine hepatitis virus (MHV) [59] . However, our results indicated that ouabain did not interfere with LCMV cell entry. In addition, treatment with the Src inhibitor 4-amino-5-(4-methylphenyl)-7-(t-butyl)pyrazolo [3,4-d] pyrimidine (PP1) did not counteract the anti-LCMV activity of ouabain (S4 Fig). Nevertheless, ATP1A1-mediated Src signaling could plausibly contribute to the inhibitory effect of ouabain on JUNV multiplication as similarly to that observed with MHV. Moreover, cell entry of JUNV occurs also by clathrin-mediated endocytosis [60] , a process affected by Src signaling. Ouabain has been clinically used in several European countries for the management of congestive heart failure, whereas bufalin has been tested in clinical trials for cancer treatments [61] , and the CST digoxin has been FDA-approved since 1997 to treat heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Hence, opportunities for the repurposing CSTs have potential as therapeutics to treat infections caused by viral hemorrhagic fever-causing arenaviruses.
The PHB inhibitor, rocaglamide, appeared to interfere with LCMV RNA synthesis and budding, but did not affect LCMV cell entry. In contrast, PHB was reported to be a cell entry receptor for DENV-2 [39] and CHIKV [40] . On the other hand, PHB did not act as a virus cell entry receptor for HCV. Rather, PHB contributed to HCV cell entry through binding to cellular RAF (c-Raf; proto-oncogene serine/threonine-protein kinase) and subsequent Harvey rat sarcoma proto-oncogene (HRas) activation that induces a signal transduction pathway required for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mediated HCV cell entry [37] . In addition, siRNA-mediated kd of PHB decreased production of H5N1 FLUAV [38] . These findings indicate that PHB is involved in different steps of the life cycle of a variety of viruses, and thereby an attractive target for the development of broad-spectrum antiviral drugs.
Rocaglate is a group of natural compounds, which includes rocaglamide, that inhibits protein synthesis by targeting the ATP-dependent DEAD-box RNA helicase eukaryotic initiation factor 4A (eIF4A) and exerts anti-tumor activity [62, 63] . The rocaglate compound, silvestrol, inhibits Ebola virus multiplication likely by interfering with the role of eIF4A in viral protein translation [64] .
While we focused on two host proteins, ATP1A1 and PHB, in this study, our proteomics approach also identified several NP-interacting host-cell proteins whose kd expression via siRNA resulted in increased LCMV multiplication. These proteins, which included MAP1B, might have anti-LCMV activity. MAP1B has been shown to bind to nonstructural proteins 1 (NS1) and 2 (NS2) of human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) [34] . NS1 and NS2 of HRSV antagonizes host IFN-I response by reducing the levels of TNF receptor associated factor (TRAF3), IKKε (NS1), and STAT2 (NS2) [65] . NS2-MAP1B interaction interfered with HRSV NS2's ability to reduce levels of STAT2, whereas the role of NS1-MAP1B interaction remains to be determined [34] . Examining the role of NP-MAP1B interaction in modulating NP's ability to inhibit induction of type I IFN is of interest.
We identified among the NP-interacting host cell proteins the RNA helicase Moloney leukemia virus 10 (MOV10), which has been reported to be an antiviral factor for FLUAV [66] , retroviruses [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] , and DENV-2 [72] . We did not observe increased LCMV multiplication in cells subjected to siRNA-mediated kd of MOV10, a finding that would question an anti-LCMV activity of MOV10. However, we consider that LCMV has already optimal multiplication in A549 cells and further increases may occur only under rather unique conditions. MOV10 was shown to enhance IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction following SeV infection through a tank binding kinase 1 (TBK1)-independent and IKKε-dependent manner. This finding was further supported by demonstrating MOV10-IKKε interaction by co-immunoprecipitation studies [73] . We documented that the anti-IFN activity of mammarenavirus NP correlated with its ability to interact with IKKε [47] . Whether NP-MOV10 interaction prevents MOV10 from enhancing IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction remains to be determined.
Several members of the mammalian chaperonin-containing T-complex (CCT) were identified as prominent hits in our NP interactome. The mammalian CCT is critical for folding of many proteins with important functions in diverse cellular processes [74] , and may protect complex protein topologies within its central cavity during biosynthesis and folding [75] . The contribution of CCT members to NP assembly into a nucleocapsid structure could account for their presence in the NP, but not eGFP, interactome. Interestingly, members of the CCT have been implicated in multiplication of different viruses including rabies virus [76, 77] , HCV [78] and FLUAV [79] . However, the role of these CCT proteins in virus multiplication remains unknown and may involve functions other than acting as molecular chaperones.
Previous studies documented the presence of several components of the of eIF4F, including 4A, within viral replication-transcription complexes (RTC) detected in cells infected with LCMV [80] and TCRV [81] . These findings, together with the detection of a number of ribosomal proteins in the NP interactome, suggest that translation of viral mRNAs may take place within RTC. However, rocaglamide interference with the activity of eIF4A within the viral RTC might contribute to its anti-LCMV activity.
In this work, we documented the generation of rLCMV/Strep-NP and its use to define the NP-interactome in infected cells. We presented evidence that ATP1A1 and PHB contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses using genetics and pharmacological inhibition of the genes. Consistent with our findings, bioinformatic analysis revealed that the protein network associated with ATP1A1 and PHB involves host cell proteins with functions in biological processes that have been implicated in virus multiplication (S5 Fig). The overall experimental approach described here can facilitate the identification of biologically relevant NP-interacting host-cell proteins. Future studies elucidating the roles of pro-and antiviral host-cell factors identified in this study in mammarenavirus multiplication will advance our understanding of the multiple functions of NP and uncover novel cellular targets for the development of antimammarenaviral drugs. In addition, by identifying proviral host-cell factors, drugs that are already approved can be repurposing as therapeutics to combat human pathogenic mammarenavirus infections.
Baby hamster kidney BHK-21 (American Type Culture Collection, ATCC, CCL-10), house mouse L929 (ATCC CCL-1), grivet Vero E6 (ATCC CRL-1586), human A549 (ATCC CCL-185), and human HEK 293T (ATCC CRL-3216) cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) containing 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, 2 mM of L-glutamine, 100 mg/ml of streptomycin, and 100 U/ml of penicillin at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 .
WT recombinant LCMVs, Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and clone-13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains, were generated as described [30, 82, 83] . Generation of rLCMV/NP(D382A) and SeV, strain Cantell, was described [30, 82, 83 ]. An rLCMV lacking GPC and expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) was generated by reverse genetics using procedures previously described [84] . rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep were generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate WT rLCMV and tri-segmented LCMV (r3LCMV) expressing eGFP [30] . For the generation of these novel rLCMVs, we created pol1S Cl-13 plasmids that directed Pol1-mediated intracellular synthesis of recombinant LCMV S genome RNA species coding for Strep-tagged NP or eGFP, respectively (Fig 1A and 1B) . The rLCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMV/eGFP) was generated as described [85] , and the rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (rLCMV/ZsG) instead of eGFP was generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMV/eGFP. Generation of rLASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP) will be described elsewhere. A tri-segmented recombinant live-attenuated Candid #1 strain of JUNV expressing eGFP (r3JUNV/eGFP) was generated as described [86] . For the generation of a novel single cycle rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP), a pol1S plasmid was created by omitting GPC open reading frame (ORF) from pol1S plasmid used for the generation of rLCMV/ZsG. scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP was rescued by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP [84] .
LCMV titers were determined by immunofocus forming assay (IFFA) as described [87] . Briefly, 10-fold serial virus dilutions were used to infect Vero E6 cell monolayers in a 96-well plate, and at 20 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). After cell permeabilization by treatment with dilution buffer (DB) (0.3% Triton X-100 in PBS-containing 3% bovine serum albumin [BSA]), cells were stained with a rat mAb to NP (VL-4, Bio X Cell, West Lebanon, NH) conjugated with Alexa Fluor 488 (VL-4-AF488, Protein Labeling Kit, Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA). VSV titers were determined by a plaque assay.
Total cell lysates were prepared in PD lysis buffer (+) (250 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% TritonX-100, 10% glycerol, 1 mM of MgCl 2 , 1 μM of CaCl 2 , 1 μM of ZnCl 2 ) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Clarified lysates were mixed at a 1:1 ratio with loading buffer (100 mM of Tris [pH 6.8], 20% 2-mercaptoethanol, 4% SDS, 0.2% bromophenol blue, 20% glycerol) and boiled for 5 min. Proteins samples were fractionated by SDS-PAGE using 4-20% gradient polyacrylamide gels (Mini-PROTEAN TGX gels 4-20%, Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA), and proteins were transferred by electroblotting onto polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Immobilin Transfer Membranes, Millipore, Billerica, MA). To detect Strep-tagged proteins, membranes were reacted with mouse monoclonal antibodies to Strep (QIAGEN, Germantown, MD), eGFP (Takara Bio USA, Mountain View, CA), GP 2 (We33/ 36), ATP1A1 (TehrmoFisher Scientific, Rockford, IL), PHB (Abcam, Cambridge, MA) or rabbit polyclonal antibodies to α-tubulin (Cell Signaling Technologies, Danvers, MA) or glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH, Millipore), respectively, followed by incubation with appropriate horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse or anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, West Grove, PA). SuperSignal West Pico or Femto chemiluminescent substrate (Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used to elicit chemiluminescent signals that were visualized using ImageQuant LAS 4000 Imager (GE Healthcare Bio-Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA).
Pull down of strep-tagged proteins from infected cell lysate. A549 cells prepared in six 15-cm dishes (approximately 1.0 x 10 8 cells in total) were infected with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP at an MOI of 0.1. At 48 h pi, cells were washed three times with ice-cold PBS, scraped into fresh ice-cold PBS, and centrifuged at 400 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Supernatant was removed, and cells were lysed with 12 ml of PD lysis buffer (+) supplemented with halt protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktail (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and 5 μg/ml of deoxyribonuclease I (Worthington Biochemical Corporation, Lakewood, NJ). Lysate was clarified by centrifugation at 3,900 x g at 4˚C for 30 min to remove cell debris. Clarified cell lysate was then incubated with strep-tactin sepharose resin (QIAGEN) at 4˚C. After 2 h of incubation, the resin was washed three times with PD lysis buffer (+) and once with PD lysis buffer without TritonX-100 (PD lysis buffer [-] ). After the centrifugation at 1,600 x g and 4˚C for 5 min, the last wash buffer was removed, and protein complexes associated with the resin were eluted into 2 ml of PD lysis buffer (-) containing 2.5 mM of desthiobiotin. The eluate was then subjected to TCA precipitation followed by trypsin digestion.
Multidimensional protein identification technology microcolumn. A MudPIT microcolumn was prepared by first creating a Kasil frit at one end of an un-deactivated 250-μm outside diameter (OD) capillary tube (interior diameter of 360 μm)(Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA). The Kasil frit was prepared by briefly dipping a 20-30-cm capillary tube in 300 μl of Kasil 1624 potassium silicate well-mixed solution (PQ Corporation, Malvern, PA) and 100 μl of formamide, curing at 100˚C for 4 h, and cutting the frit to a length of %2 mm. Strong cation exchange particles (SCX Luna, 5-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) were packed in-house from particle slurries in methanol to 2.5 cm. Reversed phase particles (2 cm, C18 Aqua, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were then successively packed onto the capillary tube using the same method as SCX loading.
MudPIT analysis. An analytical reversed-phase liquid chromatography column was generated by pulling a 100-μm (interior diameter (ID) of 360 μm) OD capillary tube (Polymicro Technologies, Phoenix, AZ) to 5-μm ID tip. Reversed-phase particles (Luna C18, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were packed directly into the pulled column at 5.5 mPa until 15 cm long. The column was further packed, washed, and equilibrated at 10 mPa with buffer B (80% acetonitrile, 0.1% formic acid) followed by buffer A (5% acetonitrile and 0.1% formic acid). MudPIT and analytical columns were assembled using a zero-dead volume union (Upchurch Scientific, Oak Harbor, WA). LC-MS/MS analysis was performed with an Agilent high-pressure LC pump (Agilent) and linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap Orbitrap Velos (Thermo) using an in-house built electrospray stage. Electrospray was performed directly from the analytical column by applying the electrospray ionization (ESI) voltage at a tee (150 μm ID, Upchurch Scientific) directly downstream of a 1:1,000 split flow to reduce the flow rate to 300 nl/min through the columns. MudPIT experiments (10-step) were performed in which each step corresponds to 0, 10, 20, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 , and 100% buffer C (500 mM of ammonium acetate, 0.1% formic acid, and 5% acetonitrile) and was run for 3 min at the beginning of a 110-min gradient.
Data analysis. Protein and peptide identification were performed with Integrated Proteomics Pipeline-IP2 (Integrated Proteomics Applications, San Diego, CA. http://www. integratedproteomics.com/) using ProLuCID and DTASelect2 algorithms. DTASelect parameters were-p 2 -y 1-trypstat-pfp .01 -extra-pI-DB-dm-in. Spectrum raw files were extracted into ms2 files from raw files using open source RawExtract 1.9.9 (Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA; http://fields.scripps.edu/downloads.php), and the tandem mass spectra were searched against a human protein database (UniprotKB). To accurately estimate peptide probabilities and false discovery rates, we used a decoy database containing the reversed sequences of all the proteins appended to the target database. Tandem mass spectra were matched to sequences using the ProLuCID algorithm with a 600-ppm peptide mass tolerance. ProLuCID searches were done on an Intel Xeon cluster processor running under the Linux operating system. The search space included half and fully tryptic peptide candidates that fell within the mass tolerance window with no miscleavage constraint. Carbamidomethylation (+57.02146 Da) of cysteine was considered as a static modification. siRNA screening A549 cells (1,000 cells/well) in a 384-well plate were reverse transfected with 0.5 pmol of siRNA pool (S2 Table) targeting each gene using 0.1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (Thermo Fisher Scientific) (final siRNA concentration was 10 nM), followed by incubation at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 . At 72 h post-transfection, cells were infected (MOI = 0.05) with rLCMV/ZsG. siRNA target host-cell proteins were selected based on availability of validated siRNA sequences. The siRNAs we used to examine the effects on LCMV multiplication of knockdown expression of NP-interacting host cell protein candidate hits corresponded to the Genome-wide ON TAR-GET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene; Dharmacon, Lafayette, CO).
A549 cells (3.0 x 10 4 cells/well) were reverse transfected in a 24-well plate with 6 pmol of siRNA pools targeting each gene using 1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (final siRNA concentration is 10 nM). At 72 h post-transfection, total cell lysate was prepared in modified lysis A buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl [pH = 8.0], 50 mM NaCl, 1%Triton X-100, 1.25% sodium deoxycholate) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. The total protein concentration of clarified cell lysate was measured by Pierce BCA Protein Assay Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The same amount of protein from each sample was subjected to SDS-PAGE, and the protein expression of siRNA-targeted genes was analyzed by western blots.
Cells infected with eGFP-or ZsGreen-expressing rLCMV were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. After cell permeabilization by treatment with DB, cells were stained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). Green fluorescence (eGFP or ZsGreen) and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, Bio-Tek, Winooski, VT).
Mock-and virus-infected cells were fixed with 4% PFA. After cell permeabilization and blocking by treatment with DB containing 1% normal goat serum, cells were incubated with primary mouse anti ATP1A1 or PHB antibody followed by secondary anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluore 568 (anti-mouse IgG-AF568). Subsequently, cells were stained with VL-4-AF488. In some samples, primary antibody against ATP1A1 or PHB was omitted to determine background fluorescence. To visualize nuclei, DAPI Fluoromount-G (SouthernBiotech, Birmingham, AL) was used to mount coverslips on a slide glass. Stained cells were observed under a confocal microscope (LSM 710, Zeiss) and data analyzed by ZEN software (Zeiss). Co-localization analysis was performed on a pixel by pixel basis using Zen software (Zeiss). Eight green (NP-positive) cells were marked and every pixel in the marked area was plotted in the scatter diagram based on its intensity level from each channel. Thresholds for green and red channels were determined using mock-infected cells stained with VL-4-AF488 (anti-NP) and anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluor 568, without using anti-ATP1A1 or -PHB antibodies. Each pixel was assigned a value of 1. Co-localization coefficients (CC) (or non-weighted CC) were determined by dividing the sum of both green-and red-positive pixels by the sum of green positive pixels. This calculation was repeated for eight individual cells. To assess the specificity of co-localization, we determined weighted CC by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal. Comparison of non-weighted and weighted CC allowed us to determine whether brighter pixels were present in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions. p values were determined by a two-tailed paired t test using GraphPad Prism software.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 2 h, followed by infection with rLCMV/eGFP (MOI = 0.01). Compounds were present to study endpoint. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS, and eGFP expression was examined by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated and rLCMV/eGFP-infected cells were set to 100%. The IC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded in a 96-well plate (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions and cultured at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 48 h. Then, CellTiter 96 AQ ueous one solution reagent (Promega, Madison, WI) was added. Thereafter, the assay was performed according to the manufacturer's recommendations, and the absorbance (490 nm) was obtained using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) reader (SPECTRA max plus 384; Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated cells were set to 100%. The CC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A plasmid expressing C-terminus Strep-tagged Z protein (pC-LCMV-Z-Strep) was generated using similar procedure to generate a plasmid expressing C-terminus FLAG-tagged LASV Z protein (pC-LASV-Z-FLAG), and the budding assay was performed as previously described [88] . Cells (HEK 293T) in a 12-well plate were transfected with 0.5 μg of empty pCAGGS vector or pC-LCMV-Z-Strep or pC-LASV-Z-FLAG using Lipofectamine 2000. At 5 h post-transfection, media were replaced with fresh media and incubated at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 19 h. Then the cells were three times washed with fresh medium. After the removal of the last wash medium, cells were cultured in fresh medium containing ouabain (30 or 40 nM) or rocaglamide (50 or 100 nM) or equivalent concentration of DMSO, and 24 h later, virion-like particle (VLP)-containing TCS and cells were collected. Total cell lysate was prepared by lysing the cells with lysis buffer (1% NP-40, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 62.5 mM NaCl, 0.4% sodium deoxycholate). After clarification of TCS from cell debris by centrifugation at 400 x g and 4˚C for 10 min, VLPs were collected by ultracentrifugation at 100,000 x g and 4˚C for 30 min through a 20% sucrose cushion. VLPs were resuspended in PBS, and Z expression in total cell lysate and TCS (containing VLPs) were analyzed by western blots.
A549 cells infected with rLCMV/eGFP were harvested using Accutase cell detachment solution (Innovative Cell Technologies, San Diego, CA) and fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. eGFP expression was examined by flow cytometry using a BD LSR II (Becton Dickson), and data were analyzed with FlowJo (Tree Star, Inc., Ashland, OR).
293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected with scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were three times washed with fresh media to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of 40 nM of ouabain or vehicle control (DMSO). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayers of BHK-21 cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. Total cell lysate was prepared in cell lysis buffer (150 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% [NP-40], 1 mM of EDTA] and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. ZsGreen signal intensity in clarified cell lysate was measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek).
A549 cells seeded (2 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with combinations of different concentrations of ouabain and rocaglamide for 2 h and then infected (MOI = 0.01) with rLCMV/eGFP. Compounds were present in the culture medium throughout the experiment. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed, permeabilized by treatment with DB, and stained with DAPI. eGFP and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). eGFP readouts were normalized by DAPI readouts, and normalized data were used to analyze synergistic effect of the two compounds by the MacSynergy II program [89] .
Data were analyzed for p values by a two-tailed unpaired t test using GraphPad Prism software. | What is the cause of Lassa fever? | 5,151 | OW Lassa virus (LASV) | 2,942 |
1,687 | Interactome analysis of the lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus nucleoprotein in infected cells reveals ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit Alpha 1 and prohibitin as host-cell factors involved in the life cycle of mammarenaviruses
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834214/
SHA: efbd0dfc426da5dd25ce29411d6fa37571623773
Authors: Iwasaki, Masaharu; Minder, Petra; Caì, Yíngyún; Kuhn, Jens H.; Yates, John R.; Torbett, Bruce E.; de la Torre, Juan C.
Date: 2018-02-20
DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892
License: cc0
Abstract: Several mammalian arenaviruses (mammarenaviruses) cause hemorrhagic fevers in humans and pose serious public health concerns in their endemic regions. Additionally, mounting evidence indicates that the worldwide-distributed, prototypic mammarenavirus, lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance. Concerns about human-pathogenic mammarenaviruses are exacerbated by of the lack of licensed vaccines, and current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to off-label use of ribavirin that is only partially effective. Detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions may facilitate the development of novel anti-mammarenavirus strategies by targeting components of the host-cell machinery that are required for efficient virus multiplication. Here we document the generation of a recombinant LCMV encoding a nucleoprotein (NP) containing an affinity tag (rLCMV/Strep-NP) and its use to capture the NP-interactome in infected cells. Our proteomic approach combined with genetics and pharmacological validation assays identified ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit alpha 1 (ATP1A1) and prohibitin (PHB) as pro-viral factors. Cell-based assays revealed that ATP1A1 and PHB are involved in different steps of the virus life cycle. Accordingly, we observed a synergistic inhibitory effect on LCMV multiplication with a combination of ATP1A1 and PHB inhibitors. We show that ATP1A1 inhibitors suppress multiplication of Lassa virus and Candid#1, a live-attenuated vaccine strain of Junín virus, suggesting that the requirement of ATP1A1 in virus multiplication is conserved among genetically distantly related mammarenaviruses. Our findings suggest that clinically approved inhibitors of ATP1A1, like digoxin, could be repurposed to treat infections by mammarenaviruses pathogenic for humans.
Text: Introduction Mammarenaviruses (Arenaviridae: Mammarenavirus) cause chronic infections of rodents worldwide [1] . Invasion of human dwellings by infected rodents can result in human infections through mucosal exposure to aerosols or by direct contact of abraded skin with infectious material. Several mammarenaviruses cause viral hemorrhagic fevers (VHFs) in humans and pose important public health problems in their endemic areas [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] . Mammarenaviruses are classified into two main groups, Old World (OW) and New World (NW) [1] . The OW Lassa virus (LASV), causative agent of Lassa fever (LF), is the most significant OW mammarenaviral pathogen. LASV is estimated to infect several hundred thousand individuals annually in Western Africa, resulting in a high number of LF cases associated with high morbidity and lethality. Moreover, LASV endemic regions are expanding [7] , and the association of the recently identified mammarenavirus Lujo virus with a VHF outbreak in Southern Africa [8, 9] has raised concerns about the emergence of novel VHF-causing mammarenaviruses. The most significant NW mammarenavirus is Junín virus (JUNV), which causes Argentinian hemorrhagic fever [10] . The worldwide-distributed OW mammarenavirus lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance especially in congenital infections [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] . Moreover, LCMV poses a particular threat to immunocompromised individuals, as has been illustrated by fatal cases of LCMV infection associated with organ transplants [16, 17] . However, LCMV research can be safely performed at BSL-2 containment, rather than the BSL-4 containment necessary for live LASV or JUNV research [18] .
No US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-licensed vaccines are available for the treatment of arenavirus infections, although a live attenuated vaccine strain of JUNV, Candid#1, is licensed in Argentina. Likewise, current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to an offlabel use of the nucleoside analogue ribavirin that is only partially effective and can cause significant side effects [19] [20] [21] . Development of effective anti-mammarenavirus drugs has been hampered by the lack of detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions required for mammarenavirus multiplication that could represent amenable targets for antiviral therapy. the potential problem that overexpression of a single viral gene product may potentiate PPI interactions that are not relevant during the course of a natural virus infection. To overcome this issue, we designed a recombinant LCMV (rLCMV) encoding a tandem [WSHPQFEK (GGGS) 3 WSHPQFEK] Strep-tag fused to the amino-terminus of NP (rLCMV/Strep-NP) (Fig 1A and 1B) . To facilitate the identification of specific PPI between NP and host cell proteins, we used our mammarenavirus tri-segmented (r3) platform [30] to design an r3LCMV expressing a C-terminus Strep-tag version of enhanced green fluorescent protein (r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep) that we used as a negative control (Fig 1A and 1B) . We rescued rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep and confirmed the expression of strep-tagged NP and eGFP in rLCMV/ Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, respectively (Fig 1C) . Next, we examined the growth properties of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep in three different cells lines from hamsters, humans, and nonhuman primates (BHK-21, A549, and Vero E6 cells, respectively) (Fig 1D) . The fitness of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep was modestly decreased compared to that observed with wild-type (WT) Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and Clone 13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains of LCMV. However, both rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep had WT-like growth kinetics and reached high titers. As with WT LCMV, infection with rLCMV/Strep-NP prevented production of bioactive IFN-I by cells in response to Sendai virus (SeV) infection as determined using an IFN bioassay based on protection against the cytopathic effect (CPE) induced by infection with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) (Fig 1E) . Vero cells treated for 16 h with tissue cultured supernatants (TCS) from A549 cells infected first with WT LCMV or rLCMV/Strep, followed by 24 h infection with SeV, remained fully susceptible to VSV-induced CPE. In contrast, Vero cells treated with TCS from A549 cells infected with rLCMV/NP(D382A), a mutant unable to prevent induction of IFN-I [30] , and subsequently with SeV, were protected against VSV induced CPE.
We selected the human A549 cell line because lung epithelial cells are one of the initial cell targets of humans following inhalation of mammarenavirions. We infected A549 cells (multiplicity of infection [MOI] = 0.1) with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep (Fig 2A) . At 48 h post-inoculation (pi), we prepared total cell lysates for pull-down (PD) assays using a sepharose resin coated with strep-tactin. Aliquots of the protein complexes present in the PD samples were fractionated by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) (Fig 2B) followed by SYPRO Ruby protein gel staining. We compared the pattern of stained protein bands detected between rLCMV/Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strepinfected samples and confirmed the presence of Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep in pertinent samples (Fig 2B) . Protein complexes in the rest of eluates from the PD samples were concentrated by trichloroacetic acid (TCA) precipitation and subjected to trypsin digestion (Fig 2A) . Digested peptides were subjected to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) analysis using a hybrid mass spectrometer consisting of linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap (LTQ) Velos and an Orbitrap analyser.
We classified host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS analysis from two independent biological replicates into two groups: 1) proteins found only in Strep-NP PD samples with at least five spectral counts ( Table 1) , and 2) proteins found in both Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep PD samples with five or higher spectral counts in Strep-NP samples and at least 2-fold higher spectral counts in Strep-NP PD compared to eGFP PD samples ( Table 2) . Filtering the data using these criteria resulted in identification of 139 candidate host-cell proteins as NP-interacting partners. Among 53 proteins found present in both NP-and eGFP-PD samples, 36 had spectral counts in the NP-PD sample that were less than two-fold higher than their corresponding spectral counts in the eGFP-PD sample (Fig 2C and S1 Table) . Based on the criteria we described above, we considered these proteins to be highly unlikely specific NPinteractors with an involvement in the LCMV life cycle, and therefore we did not consider these hits for further analysis. However, we acknowledge that we cannot formally rule out that some of these hits could still play a role on the life cycle of LCMV.
The protein annotation through evolutionary relationship (PANTHER) protein family classification (Biological Process) of the NP-interacting protein candidates revealed that a large number of proteins were involved in metabolic and cellular processes (Fig 2D) . We also analyzed the molecular functions of the NP-interacting protein candidates according to the PAN-THER protein profile classification (Fig 2E) , which revealed diversified biochemical functions enriched for nucleic acid-binding proteins and chaperones.
To initially assess pro-or anti-viral roles of NP-interacting host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS, we examined the effect of small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated knockdown (kd) of each of the corresponding genes on multiplication of rLCMV expressing reporter gene ZsGreen (ZsG) in A549 cells (Fig 3A) . The siRNAs we used were from the genome-wide ON TARGET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene). OTPs are latest generation of siRNAs and offer significant advantages over previous generations. Off-target effects are primarily driven by antisense strand microRNA (miR)-like seed activity. In OTPs, the sense strand is modified to favor antisense strand uptake whereas the antisense strand seed region is modified to drastically reduce seed-related off-targeting [33] . In addition, OTPs are designed on the foundation of the SMARTselection algorithm (Dharmacon), widely considered to be the best algorithm for rational siRNA design strategy. Numerous host-cell factors showed an anti-LCMV effect (increased ZsG expression by kd of the genes), including microtubule-associated protein 1B (MAP1B) [ [38] , dengue virus 2 (DENV-2) [39] , and chikungunya virus (CHIKV) [40] .
To begin assessing the potential biological implications of the identified NP-host cell protein interactions, we selected ATP1A1 and PHB given the availability of reagents, existing knowledge about their roles in cell physiology, and evidence of participation in multiplication of other viruses. We confirmed that cells transfected with siRNA specific to ATP1A1 and PHB exhibited the predicted reduced levels in ATP1A1 and PHB protein expression (Fig 3B) . Likewise, we examined whether siRNA-mediated reduced expression levels of ZsGreen correlated with reduced LCMV progeny titers. For this, we transfected A549 cells with siRNA targeting Expression of Strep-tagged proteins. A549 cells seeded (5.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 6-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMVs. At 48 h pi, total cell lysates were prepared, and protein expression was analyzed by western blotting. (D) Growth properties of rLCMV expressing Strep-tagged proteins. BHK-21 (1.75 x 10 5 cells/well), A549 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well), or Vero E6 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well) cells seeded in 24-well plates and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.01) with the indicated rLCMVs. At the indicated times pi, TCSs were collected and virus titers determined by IFFA. Results represent means ± SD of the results of three independent experiments. (E) Lack of induction of IFN-I in cells infected with rLCMV/Strep-NP. A549 cells were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMV or mock-infected, and 36 h later infected with SeV (MOI = 1). At 24 h pi with SeV, TCS were collected and used, following virus inactivation by U.V., to treat Vero E6 cells for 16 h, followed by infection with rVSV (MOI = 0.1) [rVSV(+)] or mockinfection [rVSV (-) ]. At 24 h pi with rVSV, cells were fixed with 4% PFA and stained with crystal violet to assess rVSV-induced cytopathic effect. We used as control rLCMV/NP(D382A) that contains mutation D382A within NP, which has been shown to abrogate the NP's ability to counteract the induction of IFN-I production.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892.g001 ATP1A1 or with NC siRNA 72 h prior to infection with rLCMV/ZsG. We found that siRNAmediated kd of ATP1A1 dramatically inhibited ZsGreen expression (Fig 3Ci) , which was associated with a significant reduction of infectious LCMV progeny (Fig 3Cii) . Our attempts to see interaction between NP and ATP1A1 or NP and PHB by co-immunoprecipitation were unsuccessful. Several possibilities could account for this, including interactions of low affinity or high on/off rate or both. Another consideration is that only a minor fraction of NP might be engaged in the interaction with a given host cell protein, and therefore, detection of these interactions would require highly sensitive methods such as LC-MS/MS. To overcome this problem we used confocal microscopy to examine the co-localization of NP with ATP1A1 and PHB in LCMV-infected cells. Weighted co-localization coefficients (CC), determined by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal, were significantly higher than non-weighted CC, indicating the presence of brighter pixels in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions (Fig 4) .
The cardiac glycoside ouabain is an inhibitor of ATP1A1 that has been used to treat congestive heart failure in European countries [41] . The PHB inhibitor rocaglamide is a flavagline from an Aglaia tree used in traditional Chinese medicine [42] that has potent anticancer activity [43] . To examine whether pharmacological inhibition of ATP1A1 or PHB inhibited LCMV multiplication, we pretreated human (A549 and HEK 293T), nonhuman primate (Vero E6), and rodent (murine L929 and hamster BHK-21) cells with ouabain or rocaglamide and infected them with rLCMV/eGFP (S1 Fig). Ouabain treatment resulted in a strong dosedependent inhibition of eGFP expression in infected human-and nonhuman primate cells, but did not affect eGFP expression intensity in infected rodent cells (S1A Fig) . This finding is consistent with rodents expressing an ATP1A1 allele that is resistant to ouabain inhibition [44] .
Likewise, we observed a dose-dependent rocaglamide inhibition of eGFP expression in all cell lines infected with rLCMV/eGFP (S1B Fig) . Consistent with these findings, production of infectious LCMV progeny was reduced by treatment with either ouabain or rocaglamide ( Fig 5A) within a concentration range that had minimal impact on cell viability (Fig 5B) . To examine the correlation between efficacy and cytotoxicity of these compounds, we determined their therapeutic index (TI = CC 50 /IC 50 (Fig 5Bi) ; whereas rocaglamide had TIs of >105 (CC 50 > 1000 nM, IC 50 = 9.51 nM) and 10.3 (CC 50 = 100 nM, IC 50 = 9.75 nM) in A549 and Vero E6 cells, respectively (Fig 5Bii) . Moreover, the ATP1A1 antagonist inhibitor, bufalin, also exhibited robust anti-LCMV activity with TIs of 8.92 (CC 50 Heat shock protein HSP 90-alpha HSP90AA1 P07900 8 10 9
Endoplasmin HSP90B1 P14625 9 9 9
Large neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1 SLC7A5 Q01650 6 12 9
Keratin, type II cuticular Hb1 KRT81 Q14533 10 8 9
Putative helicase MOV-10 MOV10 Q9HCE1 8 10 9
Microtubule-associated protein 1B MAP1B P46821 6 11 8.5
Spectrin beta chain, rocaglamide (100 nM) (Fig 5C) , further supporting a specific anti-LCMV activity of ouabain and rocaglamide that was not due to reduced cell viability.
To gain insights about the mechanisms by which ouabain and rocaglamide exert their anti-LCMV activity, we examined effects of these compounds on distinct steps of the LCMV life cycle. First, we asked whether ouabain and rocaglamide affected cell entry of LCMV. We conducted time-of-addition experiments in which we treated cells with ouabain or rocaglamide prior to virus inoculation (-1.5 h), at the time of inoculation (0 h), or 1.5 h pi (+1.5 h) (Fig 6A) .
In some samples, we used ammonium chloride starting at 4 h pi to block multiple rounds of virus infection. The timing of compound addition did not significantly change the number of eGFP-positive cells, indicating that neither ouabain nor rocaglamide inhibited cell entry of LCMV. The number of eGFP + cells in ouabain-treated cells was reduced at all time-of-addition points compared to vehicle dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-treated cells, but was similar to that observed in ammonium chloride-treated cells. Thus, ouabain did not inhibit LCMV RNA replication and gene expression, but rather a late step of the LCMV life cycle. In contrast, rocaglamide treatment resulted in a negligible number of eGFP + cells, indicating that rocaglamide inhibited virus RNA replication and gene transcription.
To further investigate the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis, we infected A549 cells with a recombinant single-cycle infectious LCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) and treated cells with either ouabain or rocaglamide. Seventy-two hours later, we determined percent normalized eGFP expression in infected cells (Fig 6B) . Consistent with our results from the time-of-addition experiment, ouabain did not affect reporter eGFP expression. However, rocaglamide reduced eGFP expression, confirming inhibitory effect of rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis.
We also examined the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on the late step of the arenavirus life cycle, Z-mediated budding. For this experiment, we transfected cells with Z-Strep-and Z-FLAG (DYKDDDDK epitope)-expressing plasmids from LCMV and LASV, respectively. At 24 h post-transfection, we removed the tissue culture supernatant (TCS) and washed extensively transfected cells to eliminate already budded Z. We cultured the transfected cells in the presence or absence of ouabain or rocaglamide. At 24 h, we determined by WB levels of Z protein in both whole cell lysates and associated with virus-like particles (VLPs) collected from TCS. Treatment with rocaglamide, but not with ouabain, caused a reduction in both LCMV and LASV Z budding efficiency (Fig 6C and 6D) . The reproducibility of these findings was confirmed based on results from four independent experiments (Fig 6E) . We also examined whether ouabain could interfere with a step of assembly of infectious progeny that was not captured by the Z budding assay through two additional experiments. The first experiment involved the use of a newly generated single-cycle infectious recombinant LCMV expressing the reporter gene ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP) to infect (MOI = 0.1) A549 cells (1 st infection). These cells were subsequently transfected with a plasmid expressing LCMV GPC. After 24 h, we used TCS to infect a fresh cell monolayer (2 nd infection) and identified infected cells based on ZsGreen expression. To assess the effect of ouabain on de novo assembly of infectious progeny we determined normalized ratios (2 nd /1 st infection) of ZsGreen + cells (Fig 6F) . The second experiment involved infection (MOI = 0.1) of cells with WT LCMV, and 48 h later we washed infected cells three times to remove the extracellular infectious progeny produced during the first 48 h of infection. Then, fresh media containing ouabain or DMSO vehicle control were added, and 24 h later we determined virus titers in TCS (Fig 6G) . Results from both experiments consistently showed that ouabain did not inhibit assembly de novo of extracellular infectious virus.
Combination therapy can significantly alleviate the problem posed by the rapid emergence of drug-resistant variants commonly observed during monotherapy strategies to control RNA virus infections. Since ouabain and rocaglamide inhibited different steps of the LCMV life cycle, we examined whether their use in combination results in a synergistic anti-LCMV effect. For this experiment, we infected A549 cells with rLCMV/eGFP and treated them with ouabain and rocaglamide using different concentrations and combinations. At 48 h pi, we determined percent eGFP expression (Fig 7) . Combination treatment with ouabain and rocaglamide resulted in synergistic anti-LCMV activity that was enhanced under conditions using higher concentrations of ouabain and lower concentrations of rocaglamide.
We next asked whether the ATP1A1 and PHB host-cell factors contributed also to multiplication of viral hemorrhagic fever-causing LASV. We treated A549 cells with ouabain, bufalin, or rocaglamide and inoculated the treated cells with recombinant LASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP). eGFP expression was examined 48 h later. Similar to rLCMV infection, LASV multiplication was restricted in ouabain-, bufalin-, or rocaglamide-treated cells at concentrations minimally impacting cell viability, although their IC 50 values were slightly higher than those found with the LCMV infection system (Fig 5B and S2 Fig) as ouabain had IC 50 of 9.34 nM, bufalin had IC 50 of 1.66 nM and rocaglamide had IC 50 of 37.0 nM (Fig 8) . We also tested the effect of compounds targeting ATP1A1 and PHB on multiplication of JUNV. Consistent with our results obtained with LCMV and LASV, ouabain, bufalin, and rocaglamide strongly suppressed JUNV multiplication (S3 Fig). These findings indicate that ATP1A1 and PHB function as pro-viral factors of a range of mammarenaviruses.
We identified ATP1A1 and PHB as novel host-cell proteins that contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses. Our approach using a recombinant LCMV expressing NP with an affinity tag facilitated defining the NP interactome in the context of LCMV infection. Recently, using an NP-specific monoclonal antibody (mAb) to precipitate NP and associated cellular protein partners in a mammarenavirus NP interactome, King et al. identified 348 host proteins that associated with LCMV NP [45] . We found 99 common proteins between our filtered LCMV NP interactome of 171 proteins and the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. Differences in both experimental conditions and analysis methodologies used to generate the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. and ours likely h post-transfection, cells were washed with fresh media to eliminate Z-mediated production of VLPs in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain or Roc-A at the indicated concentrations. VLPs present in TCS were collected by ultracentrifugation, and cell lysates were prepared. Z protein expression in VLPs and cell lysates were determined by western blots using antibodies to Strep-tag (C) and FLAG-tag (D). Budding efficiency for each sample was estimated by dividing the signal intensity of the Z protein associated with VLPs by that of Z detected in the cell lysate. Numbers on the bottom of panel C correspond to LCMV Z budding efficiencies determined in a representative experiment. Results shown in panel E correspond to the average and SD from four independent experiments including the one shown in panel D. The mean budding efficiency of DMSO treatedsamples was set to 100%. Data represent mean ± SD of four independent experiments. (F) Effect of ouabain on incorporation of viral glycoprotein into virions. 293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with scrLCMV/ZsG (1 st infection) for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were washed with fresh medium to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain at 40 nM (OUA). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayer of BHK-21 cells (2 nd infection) seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. ZsGreen signal intensity was measured by a fluorescent plate reader. GP-incorporation efficiency was estimated by dividing ZsGreen signal intensity in BHK-21 cell lysate (2 nd ) by that in 293T cell lysate (1 st ). The mean GP-incorporation efficiency of DMSO treated samples was set to 100%. Data represent means ± SD from three independent experiments. contributed to the observed differences between data sets. Despite progress in the implementation of global proteomics-based screens to identify virus-host protein-protein interactions, overlap between datasets for the same viral system is usually limited. However, the substantial overlap of 99 of the 171 NP-interacting proteins from both studies supports the overall reliability of both systems. We used results of the eGFP-Strep interactome, determined in r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, as a control to filter out non-specific NP interactions, which may have resulted in a higher degree of stringency than in the study by King et al for selection of NP-interacting candidates. The combined information provided by the NP interactome reported by King et al. and the one we present in this work, will facilitate future studies to further characterize the functional and biological implications of NP-host cell interacting proteins.
All tested mammarenavirus NPs, with exception of the NP from TCRV, blocked IRF-3-dependent IFN-I induction [25, 46] . The anti-IFN activity of NP was mapped to its C-terminal part and linked to the 3'-5' exonuclease domain present with the NP C-terminal part [30] . Inhibitor-B kinase ε (IKKε) was identified as an NP-binding protein using plasmid-mediated overexpression in transfected cells [47] , and the NP-IKKε binding affinity correlated with NP's ability to inhibit IFN-I induction [47] . We, as well as the work by King et al. [45] , did not detect this NP-IKKε interaction. This discrepancy may have been caused by very low expression of IKKε in LCMV-infected cells, which prevented detection of IKKε by LC-MS/MS. Alternatively, NP-IKKε interaction could possibility be temporarily regulated and take place at early times pi, but could be mostly absent at 48 h pi, the time at which we prepared the cell lysates for our proteomics studies. Future studies comparing the NP interactome at different times during infection will contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics of NP/hostcell protein interactions.
Na + /K + -ATPase is a well-characterized membrane ion transporter and is composed of two functional subunits (α and β) and one regulatory γ subunit [48] . ATP1A1 represents one of four α subunits [49, 50] . Recent evidence has suggested that the Na + /K + -ATPase is involved in multiple cell signaling pathways that are independent of its ion-pumping function [51] . Cardiac glycoside inhibitors of the Na + /K + -ATPase (NKA), so-called cardiotonic steroids (CST; e.g., ouabain, bufalin), have been shown to inhibit multiplication of different viruses including Ebola virus [35], coronaviruses [36], herpes simplex virus 1 [52, 53] , CHIKV [54] , human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) [55] , adenovirus [56] and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 1 [57] .
Different mechanisms are likely to contribute to the antiviral activity of CSTs, including altered cell functions modulated by the signaling activity of Na + /K + -ATPase [58] . Thus, a low concentration of ouabain induces a conformational change in ATP1A1 that results in activation and release of proto-oncogene tyrosine protein kinase, Src, from ATP1A1, followed by activation of as yet unknown downstream signaling that inhibits, for instance, cell entry of murine hepatitis virus (MHV) [59] . However, our results indicated that ouabain did not interfere with LCMV cell entry. In addition, treatment with the Src inhibitor 4-amino-5-(4-methylphenyl)-7-(t-butyl)pyrazolo [3,4-d] pyrimidine (PP1) did not counteract the anti-LCMV activity of ouabain (S4 Fig). Nevertheless, ATP1A1-mediated Src signaling could plausibly contribute to the inhibitory effect of ouabain on JUNV multiplication as similarly to that observed with MHV. Moreover, cell entry of JUNV occurs also by clathrin-mediated endocytosis [60] , a process affected by Src signaling. Ouabain has been clinically used in several European countries for the management of congestive heart failure, whereas bufalin has been tested in clinical trials for cancer treatments [61] , and the CST digoxin has been FDA-approved since 1997 to treat heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Hence, opportunities for the repurposing CSTs have potential as therapeutics to treat infections caused by viral hemorrhagic fever-causing arenaviruses.
The PHB inhibitor, rocaglamide, appeared to interfere with LCMV RNA synthesis and budding, but did not affect LCMV cell entry. In contrast, PHB was reported to be a cell entry receptor for DENV-2 [39] and CHIKV [40] . On the other hand, PHB did not act as a virus cell entry receptor for HCV. Rather, PHB contributed to HCV cell entry through binding to cellular RAF (c-Raf; proto-oncogene serine/threonine-protein kinase) and subsequent Harvey rat sarcoma proto-oncogene (HRas) activation that induces a signal transduction pathway required for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mediated HCV cell entry [37] . In addition, siRNA-mediated kd of PHB decreased production of H5N1 FLUAV [38] . These findings indicate that PHB is involved in different steps of the life cycle of a variety of viruses, and thereby an attractive target for the development of broad-spectrum antiviral drugs.
Rocaglate is a group of natural compounds, which includes rocaglamide, that inhibits protein synthesis by targeting the ATP-dependent DEAD-box RNA helicase eukaryotic initiation factor 4A (eIF4A) and exerts anti-tumor activity [62, 63] . The rocaglate compound, silvestrol, inhibits Ebola virus multiplication likely by interfering with the role of eIF4A in viral protein translation [64] .
While we focused on two host proteins, ATP1A1 and PHB, in this study, our proteomics approach also identified several NP-interacting host-cell proteins whose kd expression via siRNA resulted in increased LCMV multiplication. These proteins, which included MAP1B, might have anti-LCMV activity. MAP1B has been shown to bind to nonstructural proteins 1 (NS1) and 2 (NS2) of human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) [34] . NS1 and NS2 of HRSV antagonizes host IFN-I response by reducing the levels of TNF receptor associated factor (TRAF3), IKKε (NS1), and STAT2 (NS2) [65] . NS2-MAP1B interaction interfered with HRSV NS2's ability to reduce levels of STAT2, whereas the role of NS1-MAP1B interaction remains to be determined [34] . Examining the role of NP-MAP1B interaction in modulating NP's ability to inhibit induction of type I IFN is of interest.
We identified among the NP-interacting host cell proteins the RNA helicase Moloney leukemia virus 10 (MOV10), which has been reported to be an antiviral factor for FLUAV [66] , retroviruses [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] , and DENV-2 [72] . We did not observe increased LCMV multiplication in cells subjected to siRNA-mediated kd of MOV10, a finding that would question an anti-LCMV activity of MOV10. However, we consider that LCMV has already optimal multiplication in A549 cells and further increases may occur only under rather unique conditions. MOV10 was shown to enhance IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction following SeV infection through a tank binding kinase 1 (TBK1)-independent and IKKε-dependent manner. This finding was further supported by demonstrating MOV10-IKKε interaction by co-immunoprecipitation studies [73] . We documented that the anti-IFN activity of mammarenavirus NP correlated with its ability to interact with IKKε [47] . Whether NP-MOV10 interaction prevents MOV10 from enhancing IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction remains to be determined.
Several members of the mammalian chaperonin-containing T-complex (CCT) were identified as prominent hits in our NP interactome. The mammalian CCT is critical for folding of many proteins with important functions in diverse cellular processes [74] , and may protect complex protein topologies within its central cavity during biosynthesis and folding [75] . The contribution of CCT members to NP assembly into a nucleocapsid structure could account for their presence in the NP, but not eGFP, interactome. Interestingly, members of the CCT have been implicated in multiplication of different viruses including rabies virus [76, 77] , HCV [78] and FLUAV [79] . However, the role of these CCT proteins in virus multiplication remains unknown and may involve functions other than acting as molecular chaperones.
Previous studies documented the presence of several components of the of eIF4F, including 4A, within viral replication-transcription complexes (RTC) detected in cells infected with LCMV [80] and TCRV [81] . These findings, together with the detection of a number of ribosomal proteins in the NP interactome, suggest that translation of viral mRNAs may take place within RTC. However, rocaglamide interference with the activity of eIF4A within the viral RTC might contribute to its anti-LCMV activity.
In this work, we documented the generation of rLCMV/Strep-NP and its use to define the NP-interactome in infected cells. We presented evidence that ATP1A1 and PHB contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses using genetics and pharmacological inhibition of the genes. Consistent with our findings, bioinformatic analysis revealed that the protein network associated with ATP1A1 and PHB involves host cell proteins with functions in biological processes that have been implicated in virus multiplication (S5 Fig). The overall experimental approach described here can facilitate the identification of biologically relevant NP-interacting host-cell proteins. Future studies elucidating the roles of pro-and antiviral host-cell factors identified in this study in mammarenavirus multiplication will advance our understanding of the multiple functions of NP and uncover novel cellular targets for the development of antimammarenaviral drugs. In addition, by identifying proviral host-cell factors, drugs that are already approved can be repurposing as therapeutics to combat human pathogenic mammarenavirus infections.
Baby hamster kidney BHK-21 (American Type Culture Collection, ATCC, CCL-10), house mouse L929 (ATCC CCL-1), grivet Vero E6 (ATCC CRL-1586), human A549 (ATCC CCL-185), and human HEK 293T (ATCC CRL-3216) cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) containing 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, 2 mM of L-glutamine, 100 mg/ml of streptomycin, and 100 U/ml of penicillin at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 .
WT recombinant LCMVs, Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and clone-13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains, were generated as described [30, 82, 83] . Generation of rLCMV/NP(D382A) and SeV, strain Cantell, was described [30, 82, 83 ]. An rLCMV lacking GPC and expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) was generated by reverse genetics using procedures previously described [84] . rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep were generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate WT rLCMV and tri-segmented LCMV (r3LCMV) expressing eGFP [30] . For the generation of these novel rLCMVs, we created pol1S Cl-13 plasmids that directed Pol1-mediated intracellular synthesis of recombinant LCMV S genome RNA species coding for Strep-tagged NP or eGFP, respectively (Fig 1A and 1B) . The rLCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMV/eGFP) was generated as described [85] , and the rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (rLCMV/ZsG) instead of eGFP was generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMV/eGFP. Generation of rLASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP) will be described elsewhere. A tri-segmented recombinant live-attenuated Candid #1 strain of JUNV expressing eGFP (r3JUNV/eGFP) was generated as described [86] . For the generation of a novel single cycle rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP), a pol1S plasmid was created by omitting GPC open reading frame (ORF) from pol1S plasmid used for the generation of rLCMV/ZsG. scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP was rescued by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP [84] .
LCMV titers were determined by immunofocus forming assay (IFFA) as described [87] . Briefly, 10-fold serial virus dilutions were used to infect Vero E6 cell monolayers in a 96-well plate, and at 20 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). After cell permeabilization by treatment with dilution buffer (DB) (0.3% Triton X-100 in PBS-containing 3% bovine serum albumin [BSA]), cells were stained with a rat mAb to NP (VL-4, Bio X Cell, West Lebanon, NH) conjugated with Alexa Fluor 488 (VL-4-AF488, Protein Labeling Kit, Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA). VSV titers were determined by a plaque assay.
Total cell lysates were prepared in PD lysis buffer (+) (250 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% TritonX-100, 10% glycerol, 1 mM of MgCl 2 , 1 μM of CaCl 2 , 1 μM of ZnCl 2 ) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Clarified lysates were mixed at a 1:1 ratio with loading buffer (100 mM of Tris [pH 6.8], 20% 2-mercaptoethanol, 4% SDS, 0.2% bromophenol blue, 20% glycerol) and boiled for 5 min. Proteins samples were fractionated by SDS-PAGE using 4-20% gradient polyacrylamide gels (Mini-PROTEAN TGX gels 4-20%, Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA), and proteins were transferred by electroblotting onto polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Immobilin Transfer Membranes, Millipore, Billerica, MA). To detect Strep-tagged proteins, membranes were reacted with mouse monoclonal antibodies to Strep (QIAGEN, Germantown, MD), eGFP (Takara Bio USA, Mountain View, CA), GP 2 (We33/ 36), ATP1A1 (TehrmoFisher Scientific, Rockford, IL), PHB (Abcam, Cambridge, MA) or rabbit polyclonal antibodies to α-tubulin (Cell Signaling Technologies, Danvers, MA) or glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH, Millipore), respectively, followed by incubation with appropriate horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse or anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, West Grove, PA). SuperSignal West Pico or Femto chemiluminescent substrate (Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used to elicit chemiluminescent signals that were visualized using ImageQuant LAS 4000 Imager (GE Healthcare Bio-Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA).
Pull down of strep-tagged proteins from infected cell lysate. A549 cells prepared in six 15-cm dishes (approximately 1.0 x 10 8 cells in total) were infected with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP at an MOI of 0.1. At 48 h pi, cells were washed three times with ice-cold PBS, scraped into fresh ice-cold PBS, and centrifuged at 400 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Supernatant was removed, and cells were lysed with 12 ml of PD lysis buffer (+) supplemented with halt protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktail (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and 5 μg/ml of deoxyribonuclease I (Worthington Biochemical Corporation, Lakewood, NJ). Lysate was clarified by centrifugation at 3,900 x g at 4˚C for 30 min to remove cell debris. Clarified cell lysate was then incubated with strep-tactin sepharose resin (QIAGEN) at 4˚C. After 2 h of incubation, the resin was washed three times with PD lysis buffer (+) and once with PD lysis buffer without TritonX-100 (PD lysis buffer [-] ). After the centrifugation at 1,600 x g and 4˚C for 5 min, the last wash buffer was removed, and protein complexes associated with the resin were eluted into 2 ml of PD lysis buffer (-) containing 2.5 mM of desthiobiotin. The eluate was then subjected to TCA precipitation followed by trypsin digestion.
Multidimensional protein identification technology microcolumn. A MudPIT microcolumn was prepared by first creating a Kasil frit at one end of an un-deactivated 250-μm outside diameter (OD) capillary tube (interior diameter of 360 μm)(Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA). The Kasil frit was prepared by briefly dipping a 20-30-cm capillary tube in 300 μl of Kasil 1624 potassium silicate well-mixed solution (PQ Corporation, Malvern, PA) and 100 μl of formamide, curing at 100˚C for 4 h, and cutting the frit to a length of %2 mm. Strong cation exchange particles (SCX Luna, 5-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) were packed in-house from particle slurries in methanol to 2.5 cm. Reversed phase particles (2 cm, C18 Aqua, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were then successively packed onto the capillary tube using the same method as SCX loading.
MudPIT analysis. An analytical reversed-phase liquid chromatography column was generated by pulling a 100-μm (interior diameter (ID) of 360 μm) OD capillary tube (Polymicro Technologies, Phoenix, AZ) to 5-μm ID tip. Reversed-phase particles (Luna C18, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were packed directly into the pulled column at 5.5 mPa until 15 cm long. The column was further packed, washed, and equilibrated at 10 mPa with buffer B (80% acetonitrile, 0.1% formic acid) followed by buffer A (5% acetonitrile and 0.1% formic acid). MudPIT and analytical columns were assembled using a zero-dead volume union (Upchurch Scientific, Oak Harbor, WA). LC-MS/MS analysis was performed with an Agilent high-pressure LC pump (Agilent) and linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap Orbitrap Velos (Thermo) using an in-house built electrospray stage. Electrospray was performed directly from the analytical column by applying the electrospray ionization (ESI) voltage at a tee (150 μm ID, Upchurch Scientific) directly downstream of a 1:1,000 split flow to reduce the flow rate to 300 nl/min through the columns. MudPIT experiments (10-step) were performed in which each step corresponds to 0, 10, 20, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 , and 100% buffer C (500 mM of ammonium acetate, 0.1% formic acid, and 5% acetonitrile) and was run for 3 min at the beginning of a 110-min gradient.
Data analysis. Protein and peptide identification were performed with Integrated Proteomics Pipeline-IP2 (Integrated Proteomics Applications, San Diego, CA. http://www. integratedproteomics.com/) using ProLuCID and DTASelect2 algorithms. DTASelect parameters were-p 2 -y 1-trypstat-pfp .01 -extra-pI-DB-dm-in. Spectrum raw files were extracted into ms2 files from raw files using open source RawExtract 1.9.9 (Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA; http://fields.scripps.edu/downloads.php), and the tandem mass spectra were searched against a human protein database (UniprotKB). To accurately estimate peptide probabilities and false discovery rates, we used a decoy database containing the reversed sequences of all the proteins appended to the target database. Tandem mass spectra were matched to sequences using the ProLuCID algorithm with a 600-ppm peptide mass tolerance. ProLuCID searches were done on an Intel Xeon cluster processor running under the Linux operating system. The search space included half and fully tryptic peptide candidates that fell within the mass tolerance window with no miscleavage constraint. Carbamidomethylation (+57.02146 Da) of cysteine was considered as a static modification. siRNA screening A549 cells (1,000 cells/well) in a 384-well plate were reverse transfected with 0.5 pmol of siRNA pool (S2 Table) targeting each gene using 0.1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (Thermo Fisher Scientific) (final siRNA concentration was 10 nM), followed by incubation at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 . At 72 h post-transfection, cells were infected (MOI = 0.05) with rLCMV/ZsG. siRNA target host-cell proteins were selected based on availability of validated siRNA sequences. The siRNAs we used to examine the effects on LCMV multiplication of knockdown expression of NP-interacting host cell protein candidate hits corresponded to the Genome-wide ON TAR-GET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene; Dharmacon, Lafayette, CO).
A549 cells (3.0 x 10 4 cells/well) were reverse transfected in a 24-well plate with 6 pmol of siRNA pools targeting each gene using 1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (final siRNA concentration is 10 nM). At 72 h post-transfection, total cell lysate was prepared in modified lysis A buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl [pH = 8.0], 50 mM NaCl, 1%Triton X-100, 1.25% sodium deoxycholate) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. The total protein concentration of clarified cell lysate was measured by Pierce BCA Protein Assay Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The same amount of protein from each sample was subjected to SDS-PAGE, and the protein expression of siRNA-targeted genes was analyzed by western blots.
Cells infected with eGFP-or ZsGreen-expressing rLCMV were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. After cell permeabilization by treatment with DB, cells were stained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). Green fluorescence (eGFP or ZsGreen) and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, Bio-Tek, Winooski, VT).
Mock-and virus-infected cells were fixed with 4% PFA. After cell permeabilization and blocking by treatment with DB containing 1% normal goat serum, cells were incubated with primary mouse anti ATP1A1 or PHB antibody followed by secondary anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluore 568 (anti-mouse IgG-AF568). Subsequently, cells were stained with VL-4-AF488. In some samples, primary antibody against ATP1A1 or PHB was omitted to determine background fluorescence. To visualize nuclei, DAPI Fluoromount-G (SouthernBiotech, Birmingham, AL) was used to mount coverslips on a slide glass. Stained cells were observed under a confocal microscope (LSM 710, Zeiss) and data analyzed by ZEN software (Zeiss). Co-localization analysis was performed on a pixel by pixel basis using Zen software (Zeiss). Eight green (NP-positive) cells were marked and every pixel in the marked area was plotted in the scatter diagram based on its intensity level from each channel. Thresholds for green and red channels were determined using mock-infected cells stained with VL-4-AF488 (anti-NP) and anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluor 568, without using anti-ATP1A1 or -PHB antibodies. Each pixel was assigned a value of 1. Co-localization coefficients (CC) (or non-weighted CC) were determined by dividing the sum of both green-and red-positive pixels by the sum of green positive pixels. This calculation was repeated for eight individual cells. To assess the specificity of co-localization, we determined weighted CC by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal. Comparison of non-weighted and weighted CC allowed us to determine whether brighter pixels were present in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions. p values were determined by a two-tailed paired t test using GraphPad Prism software.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 2 h, followed by infection with rLCMV/eGFP (MOI = 0.01). Compounds were present to study endpoint. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS, and eGFP expression was examined by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated and rLCMV/eGFP-infected cells were set to 100%. The IC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded in a 96-well plate (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions and cultured at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 48 h. Then, CellTiter 96 AQ ueous one solution reagent (Promega, Madison, WI) was added. Thereafter, the assay was performed according to the manufacturer's recommendations, and the absorbance (490 nm) was obtained using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) reader (SPECTRA max plus 384; Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated cells were set to 100%. The CC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A plasmid expressing C-terminus Strep-tagged Z protein (pC-LCMV-Z-Strep) was generated using similar procedure to generate a plasmid expressing C-terminus FLAG-tagged LASV Z protein (pC-LASV-Z-FLAG), and the budding assay was performed as previously described [88] . Cells (HEK 293T) in a 12-well plate were transfected with 0.5 μg of empty pCAGGS vector or pC-LCMV-Z-Strep or pC-LASV-Z-FLAG using Lipofectamine 2000. At 5 h post-transfection, media were replaced with fresh media and incubated at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 19 h. Then the cells were three times washed with fresh medium. After the removal of the last wash medium, cells were cultured in fresh medium containing ouabain (30 or 40 nM) or rocaglamide (50 or 100 nM) or equivalent concentration of DMSO, and 24 h later, virion-like particle (VLP)-containing TCS and cells were collected. Total cell lysate was prepared by lysing the cells with lysis buffer (1% NP-40, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 62.5 mM NaCl, 0.4% sodium deoxycholate). After clarification of TCS from cell debris by centrifugation at 400 x g and 4˚C for 10 min, VLPs were collected by ultracentrifugation at 100,000 x g and 4˚C for 30 min through a 20% sucrose cushion. VLPs were resuspended in PBS, and Z expression in total cell lysate and TCS (containing VLPs) were analyzed by western blots.
A549 cells infected with rLCMV/eGFP were harvested using Accutase cell detachment solution (Innovative Cell Technologies, San Diego, CA) and fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. eGFP expression was examined by flow cytometry using a BD LSR II (Becton Dickson), and data were analyzed with FlowJo (Tree Star, Inc., Ashland, OR).
293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected with scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were three times washed with fresh media to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of 40 nM of ouabain or vehicle control (DMSO). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayers of BHK-21 cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. Total cell lysate was prepared in cell lysis buffer (150 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% [NP-40], 1 mM of EDTA] and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. ZsGreen signal intensity in clarified cell lysate was measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek).
A549 cells seeded (2 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with combinations of different concentrations of ouabain and rocaglamide for 2 h and then infected (MOI = 0.01) with rLCMV/eGFP. Compounds were present in the culture medium throughout the experiment. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed, permeabilized by treatment with DB, and stained with DAPI. eGFP and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). eGFP readouts were normalized by DAPI readouts, and normalized data were used to analyze synergistic effect of the two compounds by the MacSynergy II program [89] .
Data were analyzed for p values by a two-tailed unpaired t test using GraphPad Prism software. | What type of vaccine is JUNV, Candid#1? | 5,152 | live attenuated | 4,254 |
1,687 | Interactome analysis of the lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus nucleoprotein in infected cells reveals ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit Alpha 1 and prohibitin as host-cell factors involved in the life cycle of mammarenaviruses
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834214/
SHA: efbd0dfc426da5dd25ce29411d6fa37571623773
Authors: Iwasaki, Masaharu; Minder, Petra; Caì, Yíngyún; Kuhn, Jens H.; Yates, John R.; Torbett, Bruce E.; de la Torre, Juan C.
Date: 2018-02-20
DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892
License: cc0
Abstract: Several mammalian arenaviruses (mammarenaviruses) cause hemorrhagic fevers in humans and pose serious public health concerns in their endemic regions. Additionally, mounting evidence indicates that the worldwide-distributed, prototypic mammarenavirus, lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance. Concerns about human-pathogenic mammarenaviruses are exacerbated by of the lack of licensed vaccines, and current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to off-label use of ribavirin that is only partially effective. Detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions may facilitate the development of novel anti-mammarenavirus strategies by targeting components of the host-cell machinery that are required for efficient virus multiplication. Here we document the generation of a recombinant LCMV encoding a nucleoprotein (NP) containing an affinity tag (rLCMV/Strep-NP) and its use to capture the NP-interactome in infected cells. Our proteomic approach combined with genetics and pharmacological validation assays identified ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit alpha 1 (ATP1A1) and prohibitin (PHB) as pro-viral factors. Cell-based assays revealed that ATP1A1 and PHB are involved in different steps of the virus life cycle. Accordingly, we observed a synergistic inhibitory effect on LCMV multiplication with a combination of ATP1A1 and PHB inhibitors. We show that ATP1A1 inhibitors suppress multiplication of Lassa virus and Candid#1, a live-attenuated vaccine strain of Junín virus, suggesting that the requirement of ATP1A1 in virus multiplication is conserved among genetically distantly related mammarenaviruses. Our findings suggest that clinically approved inhibitors of ATP1A1, like digoxin, could be repurposed to treat infections by mammarenaviruses pathogenic for humans.
Text: Introduction Mammarenaviruses (Arenaviridae: Mammarenavirus) cause chronic infections of rodents worldwide [1] . Invasion of human dwellings by infected rodents can result in human infections through mucosal exposure to aerosols or by direct contact of abraded skin with infectious material. Several mammarenaviruses cause viral hemorrhagic fevers (VHFs) in humans and pose important public health problems in their endemic areas [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] . Mammarenaviruses are classified into two main groups, Old World (OW) and New World (NW) [1] . The OW Lassa virus (LASV), causative agent of Lassa fever (LF), is the most significant OW mammarenaviral pathogen. LASV is estimated to infect several hundred thousand individuals annually in Western Africa, resulting in a high number of LF cases associated with high morbidity and lethality. Moreover, LASV endemic regions are expanding [7] , and the association of the recently identified mammarenavirus Lujo virus with a VHF outbreak in Southern Africa [8, 9] has raised concerns about the emergence of novel VHF-causing mammarenaviruses. The most significant NW mammarenavirus is Junín virus (JUNV), which causes Argentinian hemorrhagic fever [10] . The worldwide-distributed OW mammarenavirus lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance especially in congenital infections [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] . Moreover, LCMV poses a particular threat to immunocompromised individuals, as has been illustrated by fatal cases of LCMV infection associated with organ transplants [16, 17] . However, LCMV research can be safely performed at BSL-2 containment, rather than the BSL-4 containment necessary for live LASV or JUNV research [18] .
No US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-licensed vaccines are available for the treatment of arenavirus infections, although a live attenuated vaccine strain of JUNV, Candid#1, is licensed in Argentina. Likewise, current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to an offlabel use of the nucleoside analogue ribavirin that is only partially effective and can cause significant side effects [19] [20] [21] . Development of effective anti-mammarenavirus drugs has been hampered by the lack of detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions required for mammarenavirus multiplication that could represent amenable targets for antiviral therapy. the potential problem that overexpression of a single viral gene product may potentiate PPI interactions that are not relevant during the course of a natural virus infection. To overcome this issue, we designed a recombinant LCMV (rLCMV) encoding a tandem [WSHPQFEK (GGGS) 3 WSHPQFEK] Strep-tag fused to the amino-terminus of NP (rLCMV/Strep-NP) (Fig 1A and 1B) . To facilitate the identification of specific PPI between NP and host cell proteins, we used our mammarenavirus tri-segmented (r3) platform [30] to design an r3LCMV expressing a C-terminus Strep-tag version of enhanced green fluorescent protein (r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep) that we used as a negative control (Fig 1A and 1B) . We rescued rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep and confirmed the expression of strep-tagged NP and eGFP in rLCMV/ Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, respectively (Fig 1C) . Next, we examined the growth properties of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep in three different cells lines from hamsters, humans, and nonhuman primates (BHK-21, A549, and Vero E6 cells, respectively) (Fig 1D) . The fitness of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep was modestly decreased compared to that observed with wild-type (WT) Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and Clone 13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains of LCMV. However, both rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep had WT-like growth kinetics and reached high titers. As with WT LCMV, infection with rLCMV/Strep-NP prevented production of bioactive IFN-I by cells in response to Sendai virus (SeV) infection as determined using an IFN bioassay based on protection against the cytopathic effect (CPE) induced by infection with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) (Fig 1E) . Vero cells treated for 16 h with tissue cultured supernatants (TCS) from A549 cells infected first with WT LCMV or rLCMV/Strep, followed by 24 h infection with SeV, remained fully susceptible to VSV-induced CPE. In contrast, Vero cells treated with TCS from A549 cells infected with rLCMV/NP(D382A), a mutant unable to prevent induction of IFN-I [30] , and subsequently with SeV, were protected against VSV induced CPE.
We selected the human A549 cell line because lung epithelial cells are one of the initial cell targets of humans following inhalation of mammarenavirions. We infected A549 cells (multiplicity of infection [MOI] = 0.1) with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep (Fig 2A) . At 48 h post-inoculation (pi), we prepared total cell lysates for pull-down (PD) assays using a sepharose resin coated with strep-tactin. Aliquots of the protein complexes present in the PD samples were fractionated by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) (Fig 2B) followed by SYPRO Ruby protein gel staining. We compared the pattern of stained protein bands detected between rLCMV/Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strepinfected samples and confirmed the presence of Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep in pertinent samples (Fig 2B) . Protein complexes in the rest of eluates from the PD samples were concentrated by trichloroacetic acid (TCA) precipitation and subjected to trypsin digestion (Fig 2A) . Digested peptides were subjected to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) analysis using a hybrid mass spectrometer consisting of linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap (LTQ) Velos and an Orbitrap analyser.
We classified host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS analysis from two independent biological replicates into two groups: 1) proteins found only in Strep-NP PD samples with at least five spectral counts ( Table 1) , and 2) proteins found in both Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep PD samples with five or higher spectral counts in Strep-NP samples and at least 2-fold higher spectral counts in Strep-NP PD compared to eGFP PD samples ( Table 2) . Filtering the data using these criteria resulted in identification of 139 candidate host-cell proteins as NP-interacting partners. Among 53 proteins found present in both NP-and eGFP-PD samples, 36 had spectral counts in the NP-PD sample that were less than two-fold higher than their corresponding spectral counts in the eGFP-PD sample (Fig 2C and S1 Table) . Based on the criteria we described above, we considered these proteins to be highly unlikely specific NPinteractors with an involvement in the LCMV life cycle, and therefore we did not consider these hits for further analysis. However, we acknowledge that we cannot formally rule out that some of these hits could still play a role on the life cycle of LCMV.
The protein annotation through evolutionary relationship (PANTHER) protein family classification (Biological Process) of the NP-interacting protein candidates revealed that a large number of proteins were involved in metabolic and cellular processes (Fig 2D) . We also analyzed the molecular functions of the NP-interacting protein candidates according to the PAN-THER protein profile classification (Fig 2E) , which revealed diversified biochemical functions enriched for nucleic acid-binding proteins and chaperones.
To initially assess pro-or anti-viral roles of NP-interacting host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS, we examined the effect of small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated knockdown (kd) of each of the corresponding genes on multiplication of rLCMV expressing reporter gene ZsGreen (ZsG) in A549 cells (Fig 3A) . The siRNAs we used were from the genome-wide ON TARGET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene). OTPs are latest generation of siRNAs and offer significant advantages over previous generations. Off-target effects are primarily driven by antisense strand microRNA (miR)-like seed activity. In OTPs, the sense strand is modified to favor antisense strand uptake whereas the antisense strand seed region is modified to drastically reduce seed-related off-targeting [33] . In addition, OTPs are designed on the foundation of the SMARTselection algorithm (Dharmacon), widely considered to be the best algorithm for rational siRNA design strategy. Numerous host-cell factors showed an anti-LCMV effect (increased ZsG expression by kd of the genes), including microtubule-associated protein 1B (MAP1B) [ [38] , dengue virus 2 (DENV-2) [39] , and chikungunya virus (CHIKV) [40] .
To begin assessing the potential biological implications of the identified NP-host cell protein interactions, we selected ATP1A1 and PHB given the availability of reagents, existing knowledge about their roles in cell physiology, and evidence of participation in multiplication of other viruses. We confirmed that cells transfected with siRNA specific to ATP1A1 and PHB exhibited the predicted reduced levels in ATP1A1 and PHB protein expression (Fig 3B) . Likewise, we examined whether siRNA-mediated reduced expression levels of ZsGreen correlated with reduced LCMV progeny titers. For this, we transfected A549 cells with siRNA targeting Expression of Strep-tagged proteins. A549 cells seeded (5.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 6-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMVs. At 48 h pi, total cell lysates were prepared, and protein expression was analyzed by western blotting. (D) Growth properties of rLCMV expressing Strep-tagged proteins. BHK-21 (1.75 x 10 5 cells/well), A549 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well), or Vero E6 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well) cells seeded in 24-well plates and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.01) with the indicated rLCMVs. At the indicated times pi, TCSs were collected and virus titers determined by IFFA. Results represent means ± SD of the results of three independent experiments. (E) Lack of induction of IFN-I in cells infected with rLCMV/Strep-NP. A549 cells were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMV or mock-infected, and 36 h later infected with SeV (MOI = 1). At 24 h pi with SeV, TCS were collected and used, following virus inactivation by U.V., to treat Vero E6 cells for 16 h, followed by infection with rVSV (MOI = 0.1) [rVSV(+)] or mockinfection [rVSV (-) ]. At 24 h pi with rVSV, cells were fixed with 4% PFA and stained with crystal violet to assess rVSV-induced cytopathic effect. We used as control rLCMV/NP(D382A) that contains mutation D382A within NP, which has been shown to abrogate the NP's ability to counteract the induction of IFN-I production.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892.g001 ATP1A1 or with NC siRNA 72 h prior to infection with rLCMV/ZsG. We found that siRNAmediated kd of ATP1A1 dramatically inhibited ZsGreen expression (Fig 3Ci) , which was associated with a significant reduction of infectious LCMV progeny (Fig 3Cii) . Our attempts to see interaction between NP and ATP1A1 or NP and PHB by co-immunoprecipitation were unsuccessful. Several possibilities could account for this, including interactions of low affinity or high on/off rate or both. Another consideration is that only a minor fraction of NP might be engaged in the interaction with a given host cell protein, and therefore, detection of these interactions would require highly sensitive methods such as LC-MS/MS. To overcome this problem we used confocal microscopy to examine the co-localization of NP with ATP1A1 and PHB in LCMV-infected cells. Weighted co-localization coefficients (CC), determined by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal, were significantly higher than non-weighted CC, indicating the presence of brighter pixels in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions (Fig 4) .
The cardiac glycoside ouabain is an inhibitor of ATP1A1 that has been used to treat congestive heart failure in European countries [41] . The PHB inhibitor rocaglamide is a flavagline from an Aglaia tree used in traditional Chinese medicine [42] that has potent anticancer activity [43] . To examine whether pharmacological inhibition of ATP1A1 or PHB inhibited LCMV multiplication, we pretreated human (A549 and HEK 293T), nonhuman primate (Vero E6), and rodent (murine L929 and hamster BHK-21) cells with ouabain or rocaglamide and infected them with rLCMV/eGFP (S1 Fig). Ouabain treatment resulted in a strong dosedependent inhibition of eGFP expression in infected human-and nonhuman primate cells, but did not affect eGFP expression intensity in infected rodent cells (S1A Fig) . This finding is consistent with rodents expressing an ATP1A1 allele that is resistant to ouabain inhibition [44] .
Likewise, we observed a dose-dependent rocaglamide inhibition of eGFP expression in all cell lines infected with rLCMV/eGFP (S1B Fig) . Consistent with these findings, production of infectious LCMV progeny was reduced by treatment with either ouabain or rocaglamide ( Fig 5A) within a concentration range that had minimal impact on cell viability (Fig 5B) . To examine the correlation between efficacy and cytotoxicity of these compounds, we determined their therapeutic index (TI = CC 50 /IC 50 (Fig 5Bi) ; whereas rocaglamide had TIs of >105 (CC 50 > 1000 nM, IC 50 = 9.51 nM) and 10.3 (CC 50 = 100 nM, IC 50 = 9.75 nM) in A549 and Vero E6 cells, respectively (Fig 5Bii) . Moreover, the ATP1A1 antagonist inhibitor, bufalin, also exhibited robust anti-LCMV activity with TIs of 8.92 (CC 50 Heat shock protein HSP 90-alpha HSP90AA1 P07900 8 10 9
Endoplasmin HSP90B1 P14625 9 9 9
Large neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1 SLC7A5 Q01650 6 12 9
Keratin, type II cuticular Hb1 KRT81 Q14533 10 8 9
Putative helicase MOV-10 MOV10 Q9HCE1 8 10 9
Microtubule-associated protein 1B MAP1B P46821 6 11 8.5
Spectrin beta chain, rocaglamide (100 nM) (Fig 5C) , further supporting a specific anti-LCMV activity of ouabain and rocaglamide that was not due to reduced cell viability.
To gain insights about the mechanisms by which ouabain and rocaglamide exert their anti-LCMV activity, we examined effects of these compounds on distinct steps of the LCMV life cycle. First, we asked whether ouabain and rocaglamide affected cell entry of LCMV. We conducted time-of-addition experiments in which we treated cells with ouabain or rocaglamide prior to virus inoculation (-1.5 h), at the time of inoculation (0 h), or 1.5 h pi (+1.5 h) (Fig 6A) .
In some samples, we used ammonium chloride starting at 4 h pi to block multiple rounds of virus infection. The timing of compound addition did not significantly change the number of eGFP-positive cells, indicating that neither ouabain nor rocaglamide inhibited cell entry of LCMV. The number of eGFP + cells in ouabain-treated cells was reduced at all time-of-addition points compared to vehicle dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-treated cells, but was similar to that observed in ammonium chloride-treated cells. Thus, ouabain did not inhibit LCMV RNA replication and gene expression, but rather a late step of the LCMV life cycle. In contrast, rocaglamide treatment resulted in a negligible number of eGFP + cells, indicating that rocaglamide inhibited virus RNA replication and gene transcription.
To further investigate the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis, we infected A549 cells with a recombinant single-cycle infectious LCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) and treated cells with either ouabain or rocaglamide. Seventy-two hours later, we determined percent normalized eGFP expression in infected cells (Fig 6B) . Consistent with our results from the time-of-addition experiment, ouabain did not affect reporter eGFP expression. However, rocaglamide reduced eGFP expression, confirming inhibitory effect of rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis.
We also examined the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on the late step of the arenavirus life cycle, Z-mediated budding. For this experiment, we transfected cells with Z-Strep-and Z-FLAG (DYKDDDDK epitope)-expressing plasmids from LCMV and LASV, respectively. At 24 h post-transfection, we removed the tissue culture supernatant (TCS) and washed extensively transfected cells to eliminate already budded Z. We cultured the transfected cells in the presence or absence of ouabain or rocaglamide. At 24 h, we determined by WB levels of Z protein in both whole cell lysates and associated with virus-like particles (VLPs) collected from TCS. Treatment with rocaglamide, but not with ouabain, caused a reduction in both LCMV and LASV Z budding efficiency (Fig 6C and 6D) . The reproducibility of these findings was confirmed based on results from four independent experiments (Fig 6E) . We also examined whether ouabain could interfere with a step of assembly of infectious progeny that was not captured by the Z budding assay through two additional experiments. The first experiment involved the use of a newly generated single-cycle infectious recombinant LCMV expressing the reporter gene ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP) to infect (MOI = 0.1) A549 cells (1 st infection). These cells were subsequently transfected with a plasmid expressing LCMV GPC. After 24 h, we used TCS to infect a fresh cell monolayer (2 nd infection) and identified infected cells based on ZsGreen expression. To assess the effect of ouabain on de novo assembly of infectious progeny we determined normalized ratios (2 nd /1 st infection) of ZsGreen + cells (Fig 6F) . The second experiment involved infection (MOI = 0.1) of cells with WT LCMV, and 48 h later we washed infected cells three times to remove the extracellular infectious progeny produced during the first 48 h of infection. Then, fresh media containing ouabain or DMSO vehicle control were added, and 24 h later we determined virus titers in TCS (Fig 6G) . Results from both experiments consistently showed that ouabain did not inhibit assembly de novo of extracellular infectious virus.
Combination therapy can significantly alleviate the problem posed by the rapid emergence of drug-resistant variants commonly observed during monotherapy strategies to control RNA virus infections. Since ouabain and rocaglamide inhibited different steps of the LCMV life cycle, we examined whether their use in combination results in a synergistic anti-LCMV effect. For this experiment, we infected A549 cells with rLCMV/eGFP and treated them with ouabain and rocaglamide using different concentrations and combinations. At 48 h pi, we determined percent eGFP expression (Fig 7) . Combination treatment with ouabain and rocaglamide resulted in synergistic anti-LCMV activity that was enhanced under conditions using higher concentrations of ouabain and lower concentrations of rocaglamide.
We next asked whether the ATP1A1 and PHB host-cell factors contributed also to multiplication of viral hemorrhagic fever-causing LASV. We treated A549 cells with ouabain, bufalin, or rocaglamide and inoculated the treated cells with recombinant LASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP). eGFP expression was examined 48 h later. Similar to rLCMV infection, LASV multiplication was restricted in ouabain-, bufalin-, or rocaglamide-treated cells at concentrations minimally impacting cell viability, although their IC 50 values were slightly higher than those found with the LCMV infection system (Fig 5B and S2 Fig) as ouabain had IC 50 of 9.34 nM, bufalin had IC 50 of 1.66 nM and rocaglamide had IC 50 of 37.0 nM (Fig 8) . We also tested the effect of compounds targeting ATP1A1 and PHB on multiplication of JUNV. Consistent with our results obtained with LCMV and LASV, ouabain, bufalin, and rocaglamide strongly suppressed JUNV multiplication (S3 Fig). These findings indicate that ATP1A1 and PHB function as pro-viral factors of a range of mammarenaviruses.
We identified ATP1A1 and PHB as novel host-cell proteins that contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses. Our approach using a recombinant LCMV expressing NP with an affinity tag facilitated defining the NP interactome in the context of LCMV infection. Recently, using an NP-specific monoclonal antibody (mAb) to precipitate NP and associated cellular protein partners in a mammarenavirus NP interactome, King et al. identified 348 host proteins that associated with LCMV NP [45] . We found 99 common proteins between our filtered LCMV NP interactome of 171 proteins and the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. Differences in both experimental conditions and analysis methodologies used to generate the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. and ours likely h post-transfection, cells were washed with fresh media to eliminate Z-mediated production of VLPs in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain or Roc-A at the indicated concentrations. VLPs present in TCS were collected by ultracentrifugation, and cell lysates were prepared. Z protein expression in VLPs and cell lysates were determined by western blots using antibodies to Strep-tag (C) and FLAG-tag (D). Budding efficiency for each sample was estimated by dividing the signal intensity of the Z protein associated with VLPs by that of Z detected in the cell lysate. Numbers on the bottom of panel C correspond to LCMV Z budding efficiencies determined in a representative experiment. Results shown in panel E correspond to the average and SD from four independent experiments including the one shown in panel D. The mean budding efficiency of DMSO treatedsamples was set to 100%. Data represent mean ± SD of four independent experiments. (F) Effect of ouabain on incorporation of viral glycoprotein into virions. 293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with scrLCMV/ZsG (1 st infection) for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were washed with fresh medium to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain at 40 nM (OUA). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayer of BHK-21 cells (2 nd infection) seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. ZsGreen signal intensity was measured by a fluorescent plate reader. GP-incorporation efficiency was estimated by dividing ZsGreen signal intensity in BHK-21 cell lysate (2 nd ) by that in 293T cell lysate (1 st ). The mean GP-incorporation efficiency of DMSO treated samples was set to 100%. Data represent means ± SD from three independent experiments. contributed to the observed differences between data sets. Despite progress in the implementation of global proteomics-based screens to identify virus-host protein-protein interactions, overlap between datasets for the same viral system is usually limited. However, the substantial overlap of 99 of the 171 NP-interacting proteins from both studies supports the overall reliability of both systems. We used results of the eGFP-Strep interactome, determined in r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, as a control to filter out non-specific NP interactions, which may have resulted in a higher degree of stringency than in the study by King et al for selection of NP-interacting candidates. The combined information provided by the NP interactome reported by King et al. and the one we present in this work, will facilitate future studies to further characterize the functional and biological implications of NP-host cell interacting proteins.
All tested mammarenavirus NPs, with exception of the NP from TCRV, blocked IRF-3-dependent IFN-I induction [25, 46] . The anti-IFN activity of NP was mapped to its C-terminal part and linked to the 3'-5' exonuclease domain present with the NP C-terminal part [30] . Inhibitor-B kinase ε (IKKε) was identified as an NP-binding protein using plasmid-mediated overexpression in transfected cells [47] , and the NP-IKKε binding affinity correlated with NP's ability to inhibit IFN-I induction [47] . We, as well as the work by King et al. [45] , did not detect this NP-IKKε interaction. This discrepancy may have been caused by very low expression of IKKε in LCMV-infected cells, which prevented detection of IKKε by LC-MS/MS. Alternatively, NP-IKKε interaction could possibility be temporarily regulated and take place at early times pi, but could be mostly absent at 48 h pi, the time at which we prepared the cell lysates for our proteomics studies. Future studies comparing the NP interactome at different times during infection will contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics of NP/hostcell protein interactions.
Na + /K + -ATPase is a well-characterized membrane ion transporter and is composed of two functional subunits (α and β) and one regulatory γ subunit [48] . ATP1A1 represents one of four α subunits [49, 50] . Recent evidence has suggested that the Na + /K + -ATPase is involved in multiple cell signaling pathways that are independent of its ion-pumping function [51] . Cardiac glycoside inhibitors of the Na + /K + -ATPase (NKA), so-called cardiotonic steroids (CST; e.g., ouabain, bufalin), have been shown to inhibit multiplication of different viruses including Ebola virus [35], coronaviruses [36], herpes simplex virus 1 [52, 53] , CHIKV [54] , human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) [55] , adenovirus [56] and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 1 [57] .
Different mechanisms are likely to contribute to the antiviral activity of CSTs, including altered cell functions modulated by the signaling activity of Na + /K + -ATPase [58] . Thus, a low concentration of ouabain induces a conformational change in ATP1A1 that results in activation and release of proto-oncogene tyrosine protein kinase, Src, from ATP1A1, followed by activation of as yet unknown downstream signaling that inhibits, for instance, cell entry of murine hepatitis virus (MHV) [59] . However, our results indicated that ouabain did not interfere with LCMV cell entry. In addition, treatment with the Src inhibitor 4-amino-5-(4-methylphenyl)-7-(t-butyl)pyrazolo [3,4-d] pyrimidine (PP1) did not counteract the anti-LCMV activity of ouabain (S4 Fig). Nevertheless, ATP1A1-mediated Src signaling could plausibly contribute to the inhibitory effect of ouabain on JUNV multiplication as similarly to that observed with MHV. Moreover, cell entry of JUNV occurs also by clathrin-mediated endocytosis [60] , a process affected by Src signaling. Ouabain has been clinically used in several European countries for the management of congestive heart failure, whereas bufalin has been tested in clinical trials for cancer treatments [61] , and the CST digoxin has been FDA-approved since 1997 to treat heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Hence, opportunities for the repurposing CSTs have potential as therapeutics to treat infections caused by viral hemorrhagic fever-causing arenaviruses.
The PHB inhibitor, rocaglamide, appeared to interfere with LCMV RNA synthesis and budding, but did not affect LCMV cell entry. In contrast, PHB was reported to be a cell entry receptor for DENV-2 [39] and CHIKV [40] . On the other hand, PHB did not act as a virus cell entry receptor for HCV. Rather, PHB contributed to HCV cell entry through binding to cellular RAF (c-Raf; proto-oncogene serine/threonine-protein kinase) and subsequent Harvey rat sarcoma proto-oncogene (HRas) activation that induces a signal transduction pathway required for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mediated HCV cell entry [37] . In addition, siRNA-mediated kd of PHB decreased production of H5N1 FLUAV [38] . These findings indicate that PHB is involved in different steps of the life cycle of a variety of viruses, and thereby an attractive target for the development of broad-spectrum antiviral drugs.
Rocaglate is a group of natural compounds, which includes rocaglamide, that inhibits protein synthesis by targeting the ATP-dependent DEAD-box RNA helicase eukaryotic initiation factor 4A (eIF4A) and exerts anti-tumor activity [62, 63] . The rocaglate compound, silvestrol, inhibits Ebola virus multiplication likely by interfering with the role of eIF4A in viral protein translation [64] .
While we focused on two host proteins, ATP1A1 and PHB, in this study, our proteomics approach also identified several NP-interacting host-cell proteins whose kd expression via siRNA resulted in increased LCMV multiplication. These proteins, which included MAP1B, might have anti-LCMV activity. MAP1B has been shown to bind to nonstructural proteins 1 (NS1) and 2 (NS2) of human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) [34] . NS1 and NS2 of HRSV antagonizes host IFN-I response by reducing the levels of TNF receptor associated factor (TRAF3), IKKε (NS1), and STAT2 (NS2) [65] . NS2-MAP1B interaction interfered with HRSV NS2's ability to reduce levels of STAT2, whereas the role of NS1-MAP1B interaction remains to be determined [34] . Examining the role of NP-MAP1B interaction in modulating NP's ability to inhibit induction of type I IFN is of interest.
We identified among the NP-interacting host cell proteins the RNA helicase Moloney leukemia virus 10 (MOV10), which has been reported to be an antiviral factor for FLUAV [66] , retroviruses [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] , and DENV-2 [72] . We did not observe increased LCMV multiplication in cells subjected to siRNA-mediated kd of MOV10, a finding that would question an anti-LCMV activity of MOV10. However, we consider that LCMV has already optimal multiplication in A549 cells and further increases may occur only under rather unique conditions. MOV10 was shown to enhance IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction following SeV infection through a tank binding kinase 1 (TBK1)-independent and IKKε-dependent manner. This finding was further supported by demonstrating MOV10-IKKε interaction by co-immunoprecipitation studies [73] . We documented that the anti-IFN activity of mammarenavirus NP correlated with its ability to interact with IKKε [47] . Whether NP-MOV10 interaction prevents MOV10 from enhancing IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction remains to be determined.
Several members of the mammalian chaperonin-containing T-complex (CCT) were identified as prominent hits in our NP interactome. The mammalian CCT is critical for folding of many proteins with important functions in diverse cellular processes [74] , and may protect complex protein topologies within its central cavity during biosynthesis and folding [75] . The contribution of CCT members to NP assembly into a nucleocapsid structure could account for their presence in the NP, but not eGFP, interactome. Interestingly, members of the CCT have been implicated in multiplication of different viruses including rabies virus [76, 77] , HCV [78] and FLUAV [79] . However, the role of these CCT proteins in virus multiplication remains unknown and may involve functions other than acting as molecular chaperones.
Previous studies documented the presence of several components of the of eIF4F, including 4A, within viral replication-transcription complexes (RTC) detected in cells infected with LCMV [80] and TCRV [81] . These findings, together with the detection of a number of ribosomal proteins in the NP interactome, suggest that translation of viral mRNAs may take place within RTC. However, rocaglamide interference with the activity of eIF4A within the viral RTC might contribute to its anti-LCMV activity.
In this work, we documented the generation of rLCMV/Strep-NP and its use to define the NP-interactome in infected cells. We presented evidence that ATP1A1 and PHB contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses using genetics and pharmacological inhibition of the genes. Consistent with our findings, bioinformatic analysis revealed that the protein network associated with ATP1A1 and PHB involves host cell proteins with functions in biological processes that have been implicated in virus multiplication (S5 Fig). The overall experimental approach described here can facilitate the identification of biologically relevant NP-interacting host-cell proteins. Future studies elucidating the roles of pro-and antiviral host-cell factors identified in this study in mammarenavirus multiplication will advance our understanding of the multiple functions of NP and uncover novel cellular targets for the development of antimammarenaviral drugs. In addition, by identifying proviral host-cell factors, drugs that are already approved can be repurposing as therapeutics to combat human pathogenic mammarenavirus infections.
Baby hamster kidney BHK-21 (American Type Culture Collection, ATCC, CCL-10), house mouse L929 (ATCC CCL-1), grivet Vero E6 (ATCC CRL-1586), human A549 (ATCC CCL-185), and human HEK 293T (ATCC CRL-3216) cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) containing 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, 2 mM of L-glutamine, 100 mg/ml of streptomycin, and 100 U/ml of penicillin at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 .
WT recombinant LCMVs, Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and clone-13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains, were generated as described [30, 82, 83] . Generation of rLCMV/NP(D382A) and SeV, strain Cantell, was described [30, 82, 83 ]. An rLCMV lacking GPC and expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) was generated by reverse genetics using procedures previously described [84] . rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep were generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate WT rLCMV and tri-segmented LCMV (r3LCMV) expressing eGFP [30] . For the generation of these novel rLCMVs, we created pol1S Cl-13 plasmids that directed Pol1-mediated intracellular synthesis of recombinant LCMV S genome RNA species coding for Strep-tagged NP or eGFP, respectively (Fig 1A and 1B) . The rLCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMV/eGFP) was generated as described [85] , and the rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (rLCMV/ZsG) instead of eGFP was generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMV/eGFP. Generation of rLASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP) will be described elsewhere. A tri-segmented recombinant live-attenuated Candid #1 strain of JUNV expressing eGFP (r3JUNV/eGFP) was generated as described [86] . For the generation of a novel single cycle rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP), a pol1S plasmid was created by omitting GPC open reading frame (ORF) from pol1S plasmid used for the generation of rLCMV/ZsG. scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP was rescued by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP [84] .
LCMV titers were determined by immunofocus forming assay (IFFA) as described [87] . Briefly, 10-fold serial virus dilutions were used to infect Vero E6 cell monolayers in a 96-well plate, and at 20 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). After cell permeabilization by treatment with dilution buffer (DB) (0.3% Triton X-100 in PBS-containing 3% bovine serum albumin [BSA]), cells were stained with a rat mAb to NP (VL-4, Bio X Cell, West Lebanon, NH) conjugated with Alexa Fluor 488 (VL-4-AF488, Protein Labeling Kit, Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA). VSV titers were determined by a plaque assay.
Total cell lysates were prepared in PD lysis buffer (+) (250 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% TritonX-100, 10% glycerol, 1 mM of MgCl 2 , 1 μM of CaCl 2 , 1 μM of ZnCl 2 ) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Clarified lysates were mixed at a 1:1 ratio with loading buffer (100 mM of Tris [pH 6.8], 20% 2-mercaptoethanol, 4% SDS, 0.2% bromophenol blue, 20% glycerol) and boiled for 5 min. Proteins samples were fractionated by SDS-PAGE using 4-20% gradient polyacrylamide gels (Mini-PROTEAN TGX gels 4-20%, Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA), and proteins were transferred by electroblotting onto polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Immobilin Transfer Membranes, Millipore, Billerica, MA). To detect Strep-tagged proteins, membranes were reacted with mouse monoclonal antibodies to Strep (QIAGEN, Germantown, MD), eGFP (Takara Bio USA, Mountain View, CA), GP 2 (We33/ 36), ATP1A1 (TehrmoFisher Scientific, Rockford, IL), PHB (Abcam, Cambridge, MA) or rabbit polyclonal antibodies to α-tubulin (Cell Signaling Technologies, Danvers, MA) or glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH, Millipore), respectively, followed by incubation with appropriate horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse or anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, West Grove, PA). SuperSignal West Pico or Femto chemiluminescent substrate (Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used to elicit chemiluminescent signals that were visualized using ImageQuant LAS 4000 Imager (GE Healthcare Bio-Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA).
Pull down of strep-tagged proteins from infected cell lysate. A549 cells prepared in six 15-cm dishes (approximately 1.0 x 10 8 cells in total) were infected with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP at an MOI of 0.1. At 48 h pi, cells were washed three times with ice-cold PBS, scraped into fresh ice-cold PBS, and centrifuged at 400 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Supernatant was removed, and cells were lysed with 12 ml of PD lysis buffer (+) supplemented with halt protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktail (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and 5 μg/ml of deoxyribonuclease I (Worthington Biochemical Corporation, Lakewood, NJ). Lysate was clarified by centrifugation at 3,900 x g at 4˚C for 30 min to remove cell debris. Clarified cell lysate was then incubated with strep-tactin sepharose resin (QIAGEN) at 4˚C. After 2 h of incubation, the resin was washed three times with PD lysis buffer (+) and once with PD lysis buffer without TritonX-100 (PD lysis buffer [-] ). After the centrifugation at 1,600 x g and 4˚C for 5 min, the last wash buffer was removed, and protein complexes associated with the resin were eluted into 2 ml of PD lysis buffer (-) containing 2.5 mM of desthiobiotin. The eluate was then subjected to TCA precipitation followed by trypsin digestion.
Multidimensional protein identification technology microcolumn. A MudPIT microcolumn was prepared by first creating a Kasil frit at one end of an un-deactivated 250-μm outside diameter (OD) capillary tube (interior diameter of 360 μm)(Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA). The Kasil frit was prepared by briefly dipping a 20-30-cm capillary tube in 300 μl of Kasil 1624 potassium silicate well-mixed solution (PQ Corporation, Malvern, PA) and 100 μl of formamide, curing at 100˚C for 4 h, and cutting the frit to a length of %2 mm. Strong cation exchange particles (SCX Luna, 5-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) were packed in-house from particle slurries in methanol to 2.5 cm. Reversed phase particles (2 cm, C18 Aqua, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were then successively packed onto the capillary tube using the same method as SCX loading.
MudPIT analysis. An analytical reversed-phase liquid chromatography column was generated by pulling a 100-μm (interior diameter (ID) of 360 μm) OD capillary tube (Polymicro Technologies, Phoenix, AZ) to 5-μm ID tip. Reversed-phase particles (Luna C18, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were packed directly into the pulled column at 5.5 mPa until 15 cm long. The column was further packed, washed, and equilibrated at 10 mPa with buffer B (80% acetonitrile, 0.1% formic acid) followed by buffer A (5% acetonitrile and 0.1% formic acid). MudPIT and analytical columns were assembled using a zero-dead volume union (Upchurch Scientific, Oak Harbor, WA). LC-MS/MS analysis was performed with an Agilent high-pressure LC pump (Agilent) and linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap Orbitrap Velos (Thermo) using an in-house built electrospray stage. Electrospray was performed directly from the analytical column by applying the electrospray ionization (ESI) voltage at a tee (150 μm ID, Upchurch Scientific) directly downstream of a 1:1,000 split flow to reduce the flow rate to 300 nl/min through the columns. MudPIT experiments (10-step) were performed in which each step corresponds to 0, 10, 20, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 , and 100% buffer C (500 mM of ammonium acetate, 0.1% formic acid, and 5% acetonitrile) and was run for 3 min at the beginning of a 110-min gradient.
Data analysis. Protein and peptide identification were performed with Integrated Proteomics Pipeline-IP2 (Integrated Proteomics Applications, San Diego, CA. http://www. integratedproteomics.com/) using ProLuCID and DTASelect2 algorithms. DTASelect parameters were-p 2 -y 1-trypstat-pfp .01 -extra-pI-DB-dm-in. Spectrum raw files were extracted into ms2 files from raw files using open source RawExtract 1.9.9 (Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA; http://fields.scripps.edu/downloads.php), and the tandem mass spectra were searched against a human protein database (UniprotKB). To accurately estimate peptide probabilities and false discovery rates, we used a decoy database containing the reversed sequences of all the proteins appended to the target database. Tandem mass spectra were matched to sequences using the ProLuCID algorithm with a 600-ppm peptide mass tolerance. ProLuCID searches were done on an Intel Xeon cluster processor running under the Linux operating system. The search space included half and fully tryptic peptide candidates that fell within the mass tolerance window with no miscleavage constraint. Carbamidomethylation (+57.02146 Da) of cysteine was considered as a static modification. siRNA screening A549 cells (1,000 cells/well) in a 384-well plate were reverse transfected with 0.5 pmol of siRNA pool (S2 Table) targeting each gene using 0.1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (Thermo Fisher Scientific) (final siRNA concentration was 10 nM), followed by incubation at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 . At 72 h post-transfection, cells were infected (MOI = 0.05) with rLCMV/ZsG. siRNA target host-cell proteins were selected based on availability of validated siRNA sequences. The siRNAs we used to examine the effects on LCMV multiplication of knockdown expression of NP-interacting host cell protein candidate hits corresponded to the Genome-wide ON TAR-GET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene; Dharmacon, Lafayette, CO).
A549 cells (3.0 x 10 4 cells/well) were reverse transfected in a 24-well plate with 6 pmol of siRNA pools targeting each gene using 1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (final siRNA concentration is 10 nM). At 72 h post-transfection, total cell lysate was prepared in modified lysis A buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl [pH = 8.0], 50 mM NaCl, 1%Triton X-100, 1.25% sodium deoxycholate) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. The total protein concentration of clarified cell lysate was measured by Pierce BCA Protein Assay Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The same amount of protein from each sample was subjected to SDS-PAGE, and the protein expression of siRNA-targeted genes was analyzed by western blots.
Cells infected with eGFP-or ZsGreen-expressing rLCMV were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. After cell permeabilization by treatment with DB, cells were stained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). Green fluorescence (eGFP or ZsGreen) and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, Bio-Tek, Winooski, VT).
Mock-and virus-infected cells were fixed with 4% PFA. After cell permeabilization and blocking by treatment with DB containing 1% normal goat serum, cells were incubated with primary mouse anti ATP1A1 or PHB antibody followed by secondary anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluore 568 (anti-mouse IgG-AF568). Subsequently, cells were stained with VL-4-AF488. In some samples, primary antibody against ATP1A1 or PHB was omitted to determine background fluorescence. To visualize nuclei, DAPI Fluoromount-G (SouthernBiotech, Birmingham, AL) was used to mount coverslips on a slide glass. Stained cells were observed under a confocal microscope (LSM 710, Zeiss) and data analyzed by ZEN software (Zeiss). Co-localization analysis was performed on a pixel by pixel basis using Zen software (Zeiss). Eight green (NP-positive) cells were marked and every pixel in the marked area was plotted in the scatter diagram based on its intensity level from each channel. Thresholds for green and red channels were determined using mock-infected cells stained with VL-4-AF488 (anti-NP) and anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluor 568, without using anti-ATP1A1 or -PHB antibodies. Each pixel was assigned a value of 1. Co-localization coefficients (CC) (or non-weighted CC) were determined by dividing the sum of both green-and red-positive pixels by the sum of green positive pixels. This calculation was repeated for eight individual cells. To assess the specificity of co-localization, we determined weighted CC by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal. Comparison of non-weighted and weighted CC allowed us to determine whether brighter pixels were present in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions. p values were determined by a two-tailed paired t test using GraphPad Prism software.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 2 h, followed by infection with rLCMV/eGFP (MOI = 0.01). Compounds were present to study endpoint. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS, and eGFP expression was examined by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated and rLCMV/eGFP-infected cells were set to 100%. The IC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded in a 96-well plate (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions and cultured at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 48 h. Then, CellTiter 96 AQ ueous one solution reagent (Promega, Madison, WI) was added. Thereafter, the assay was performed according to the manufacturer's recommendations, and the absorbance (490 nm) was obtained using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) reader (SPECTRA max plus 384; Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated cells were set to 100%. The CC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A plasmid expressing C-terminus Strep-tagged Z protein (pC-LCMV-Z-Strep) was generated using similar procedure to generate a plasmid expressing C-terminus FLAG-tagged LASV Z protein (pC-LASV-Z-FLAG), and the budding assay was performed as previously described [88] . Cells (HEK 293T) in a 12-well plate were transfected with 0.5 μg of empty pCAGGS vector or pC-LCMV-Z-Strep or pC-LASV-Z-FLAG using Lipofectamine 2000. At 5 h post-transfection, media were replaced with fresh media and incubated at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 19 h. Then the cells were three times washed with fresh medium. After the removal of the last wash medium, cells were cultured in fresh medium containing ouabain (30 or 40 nM) or rocaglamide (50 or 100 nM) or equivalent concentration of DMSO, and 24 h later, virion-like particle (VLP)-containing TCS and cells were collected. Total cell lysate was prepared by lysing the cells with lysis buffer (1% NP-40, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 62.5 mM NaCl, 0.4% sodium deoxycholate). After clarification of TCS from cell debris by centrifugation at 400 x g and 4˚C for 10 min, VLPs were collected by ultracentrifugation at 100,000 x g and 4˚C for 30 min through a 20% sucrose cushion. VLPs were resuspended in PBS, and Z expression in total cell lysate and TCS (containing VLPs) were analyzed by western blots.
A549 cells infected with rLCMV/eGFP were harvested using Accutase cell detachment solution (Innovative Cell Technologies, San Diego, CA) and fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. eGFP expression was examined by flow cytometry using a BD LSR II (Becton Dickson), and data were analyzed with FlowJo (Tree Star, Inc., Ashland, OR).
293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected with scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were three times washed with fresh media to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of 40 nM of ouabain or vehicle control (DMSO). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayers of BHK-21 cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. Total cell lysate was prepared in cell lysis buffer (150 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% [NP-40], 1 mM of EDTA] and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. ZsGreen signal intensity in clarified cell lysate was measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek).
A549 cells seeded (2 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with combinations of different concentrations of ouabain and rocaglamide for 2 h and then infected (MOI = 0.01) with rLCMV/eGFP. Compounds were present in the culture medium throughout the experiment. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed, permeabilized by treatment with DB, and stained with DAPI. eGFP and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). eGFP readouts were normalized by DAPI readouts, and normalized data were used to analyze synergistic effect of the two compounds by the MacSynergy II program [89] .
Data were analyzed for p values by a two-tailed unpaired t test using GraphPad Prism software. | Why was the human A549 cell line chosen for this study? | 5,153 | lung epithelial cells are one of the initial cell targets of humans following inhalation of mammarenavirions | 6,917 |
1,687 | Interactome analysis of the lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus nucleoprotein in infected cells reveals ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit Alpha 1 and prohibitin as host-cell factors involved in the life cycle of mammarenaviruses
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834214/
SHA: efbd0dfc426da5dd25ce29411d6fa37571623773
Authors: Iwasaki, Masaharu; Minder, Petra; Caì, Yíngyún; Kuhn, Jens H.; Yates, John R.; Torbett, Bruce E.; de la Torre, Juan C.
Date: 2018-02-20
DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892
License: cc0
Abstract: Several mammalian arenaviruses (mammarenaviruses) cause hemorrhagic fevers in humans and pose serious public health concerns in their endemic regions. Additionally, mounting evidence indicates that the worldwide-distributed, prototypic mammarenavirus, lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance. Concerns about human-pathogenic mammarenaviruses are exacerbated by of the lack of licensed vaccines, and current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to off-label use of ribavirin that is only partially effective. Detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions may facilitate the development of novel anti-mammarenavirus strategies by targeting components of the host-cell machinery that are required for efficient virus multiplication. Here we document the generation of a recombinant LCMV encoding a nucleoprotein (NP) containing an affinity tag (rLCMV/Strep-NP) and its use to capture the NP-interactome in infected cells. Our proteomic approach combined with genetics and pharmacological validation assays identified ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit alpha 1 (ATP1A1) and prohibitin (PHB) as pro-viral factors. Cell-based assays revealed that ATP1A1 and PHB are involved in different steps of the virus life cycle. Accordingly, we observed a synergistic inhibitory effect on LCMV multiplication with a combination of ATP1A1 and PHB inhibitors. We show that ATP1A1 inhibitors suppress multiplication of Lassa virus and Candid#1, a live-attenuated vaccine strain of Junín virus, suggesting that the requirement of ATP1A1 in virus multiplication is conserved among genetically distantly related mammarenaviruses. Our findings suggest that clinically approved inhibitors of ATP1A1, like digoxin, could be repurposed to treat infections by mammarenaviruses pathogenic for humans.
Text: Introduction Mammarenaviruses (Arenaviridae: Mammarenavirus) cause chronic infections of rodents worldwide [1] . Invasion of human dwellings by infected rodents can result in human infections through mucosal exposure to aerosols or by direct contact of abraded skin with infectious material. Several mammarenaviruses cause viral hemorrhagic fevers (VHFs) in humans and pose important public health problems in their endemic areas [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] . Mammarenaviruses are classified into two main groups, Old World (OW) and New World (NW) [1] . The OW Lassa virus (LASV), causative agent of Lassa fever (LF), is the most significant OW mammarenaviral pathogen. LASV is estimated to infect several hundred thousand individuals annually in Western Africa, resulting in a high number of LF cases associated with high morbidity and lethality. Moreover, LASV endemic regions are expanding [7] , and the association of the recently identified mammarenavirus Lujo virus with a VHF outbreak in Southern Africa [8, 9] has raised concerns about the emergence of novel VHF-causing mammarenaviruses. The most significant NW mammarenavirus is Junín virus (JUNV), which causes Argentinian hemorrhagic fever [10] . The worldwide-distributed OW mammarenavirus lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance especially in congenital infections [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] . Moreover, LCMV poses a particular threat to immunocompromised individuals, as has been illustrated by fatal cases of LCMV infection associated with organ transplants [16, 17] . However, LCMV research can be safely performed at BSL-2 containment, rather than the BSL-4 containment necessary for live LASV or JUNV research [18] .
No US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-licensed vaccines are available for the treatment of arenavirus infections, although a live attenuated vaccine strain of JUNV, Candid#1, is licensed in Argentina. Likewise, current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to an offlabel use of the nucleoside analogue ribavirin that is only partially effective and can cause significant side effects [19] [20] [21] . Development of effective anti-mammarenavirus drugs has been hampered by the lack of detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions required for mammarenavirus multiplication that could represent amenable targets for antiviral therapy. the potential problem that overexpression of a single viral gene product may potentiate PPI interactions that are not relevant during the course of a natural virus infection. To overcome this issue, we designed a recombinant LCMV (rLCMV) encoding a tandem [WSHPQFEK (GGGS) 3 WSHPQFEK] Strep-tag fused to the amino-terminus of NP (rLCMV/Strep-NP) (Fig 1A and 1B) . To facilitate the identification of specific PPI between NP and host cell proteins, we used our mammarenavirus tri-segmented (r3) platform [30] to design an r3LCMV expressing a C-terminus Strep-tag version of enhanced green fluorescent protein (r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep) that we used as a negative control (Fig 1A and 1B) . We rescued rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep and confirmed the expression of strep-tagged NP and eGFP in rLCMV/ Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, respectively (Fig 1C) . Next, we examined the growth properties of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep in three different cells lines from hamsters, humans, and nonhuman primates (BHK-21, A549, and Vero E6 cells, respectively) (Fig 1D) . The fitness of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep was modestly decreased compared to that observed with wild-type (WT) Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and Clone 13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains of LCMV. However, both rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep had WT-like growth kinetics and reached high titers. As with WT LCMV, infection with rLCMV/Strep-NP prevented production of bioactive IFN-I by cells in response to Sendai virus (SeV) infection as determined using an IFN bioassay based on protection against the cytopathic effect (CPE) induced by infection with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) (Fig 1E) . Vero cells treated for 16 h with tissue cultured supernatants (TCS) from A549 cells infected first with WT LCMV or rLCMV/Strep, followed by 24 h infection with SeV, remained fully susceptible to VSV-induced CPE. In contrast, Vero cells treated with TCS from A549 cells infected with rLCMV/NP(D382A), a mutant unable to prevent induction of IFN-I [30] , and subsequently with SeV, were protected against VSV induced CPE.
We selected the human A549 cell line because lung epithelial cells are one of the initial cell targets of humans following inhalation of mammarenavirions. We infected A549 cells (multiplicity of infection [MOI] = 0.1) with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep (Fig 2A) . At 48 h post-inoculation (pi), we prepared total cell lysates for pull-down (PD) assays using a sepharose resin coated with strep-tactin. Aliquots of the protein complexes present in the PD samples were fractionated by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) (Fig 2B) followed by SYPRO Ruby protein gel staining. We compared the pattern of stained protein bands detected between rLCMV/Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strepinfected samples and confirmed the presence of Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep in pertinent samples (Fig 2B) . Protein complexes in the rest of eluates from the PD samples were concentrated by trichloroacetic acid (TCA) precipitation and subjected to trypsin digestion (Fig 2A) . Digested peptides were subjected to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) analysis using a hybrid mass spectrometer consisting of linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap (LTQ) Velos and an Orbitrap analyser.
We classified host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS analysis from two independent biological replicates into two groups: 1) proteins found only in Strep-NP PD samples with at least five spectral counts ( Table 1) , and 2) proteins found in both Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep PD samples with five or higher spectral counts in Strep-NP samples and at least 2-fold higher spectral counts in Strep-NP PD compared to eGFP PD samples ( Table 2) . Filtering the data using these criteria resulted in identification of 139 candidate host-cell proteins as NP-interacting partners. Among 53 proteins found present in both NP-and eGFP-PD samples, 36 had spectral counts in the NP-PD sample that were less than two-fold higher than their corresponding spectral counts in the eGFP-PD sample (Fig 2C and S1 Table) . Based on the criteria we described above, we considered these proteins to be highly unlikely specific NPinteractors with an involvement in the LCMV life cycle, and therefore we did not consider these hits for further analysis. However, we acknowledge that we cannot formally rule out that some of these hits could still play a role on the life cycle of LCMV.
The protein annotation through evolutionary relationship (PANTHER) protein family classification (Biological Process) of the NP-interacting protein candidates revealed that a large number of proteins were involved in metabolic and cellular processes (Fig 2D) . We also analyzed the molecular functions of the NP-interacting protein candidates according to the PAN-THER protein profile classification (Fig 2E) , which revealed diversified biochemical functions enriched for nucleic acid-binding proteins and chaperones.
To initially assess pro-or anti-viral roles of NP-interacting host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS, we examined the effect of small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated knockdown (kd) of each of the corresponding genes on multiplication of rLCMV expressing reporter gene ZsGreen (ZsG) in A549 cells (Fig 3A) . The siRNAs we used were from the genome-wide ON TARGET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene). OTPs are latest generation of siRNAs and offer significant advantages over previous generations. Off-target effects are primarily driven by antisense strand microRNA (miR)-like seed activity. In OTPs, the sense strand is modified to favor antisense strand uptake whereas the antisense strand seed region is modified to drastically reduce seed-related off-targeting [33] . In addition, OTPs are designed on the foundation of the SMARTselection algorithm (Dharmacon), widely considered to be the best algorithm for rational siRNA design strategy. Numerous host-cell factors showed an anti-LCMV effect (increased ZsG expression by kd of the genes), including microtubule-associated protein 1B (MAP1B) [ [38] , dengue virus 2 (DENV-2) [39] , and chikungunya virus (CHIKV) [40] .
To begin assessing the potential biological implications of the identified NP-host cell protein interactions, we selected ATP1A1 and PHB given the availability of reagents, existing knowledge about their roles in cell physiology, and evidence of participation in multiplication of other viruses. We confirmed that cells transfected with siRNA specific to ATP1A1 and PHB exhibited the predicted reduced levels in ATP1A1 and PHB protein expression (Fig 3B) . Likewise, we examined whether siRNA-mediated reduced expression levels of ZsGreen correlated with reduced LCMV progeny titers. For this, we transfected A549 cells with siRNA targeting Expression of Strep-tagged proteins. A549 cells seeded (5.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 6-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMVs. At 48 h pi, total cell lysates were prepared, and protein expression was analyzed by western blotting. (D) Growth properties of rLCMV expressing Strep-tagged proteins. BHK-21 (1.75 x 10 5 cells/well), A549 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well), or Vero E6 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well) cells seeded in 24-well plates and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.01) with the indicated rLCMVs. At the indicated times pi, TCSs were collected and virus titers determined by IFFA. Results represent means ± SD of the results of three independent experiments. (E) Lack of induction of IFN-I in cells infected with rLCMV/Strep-NP. A549 cells were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMV or mock-infected, and 36 h later infected with SeV (MOI = 1). At 24 h pi with SeV, TCS were collected and used, following virus inactivation by U.V., to treat Vero E6 cells for 16 h, followed by infection with rVSV (MOI = 0.1) [rVSV(+)] or mockinfection [rVSV (-) ]. At 24 h pi with rVSV, cells were fixed with 4% PFA and stained with crystal violet to assess rVSV-induced cytopathic effect. We used as control rLCMV/NP(D382A) that contains mutation D382A within NP, which has been shown to abrogate the NP's ability to counteract the induction of IFN-I production.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892.g001 ATP1A1 or with NC siRNA 72 h prior to infection with rLCMV/ZsG. We found that siRNAmediated kd of ATP1A1 dramatically inhibited ZsGreen expression (Fig 3Ci) , which was associated with a significant reduction of infectious LCMV progeny (Fig 3Cii) . Our attempts to see interaction between NP and ATP1A1 or NP and PHB by co-immunoprecipitation were unsuccessful. Several possibilities could account for this, including interactions of low affinity or high on/off rate or both. Another consideration is that only a minor fraction of NP might be engaged in the interaction with a given host cell protein, and therefore, detection of these interactions would require highly sensitive methods such as LC-MS/MS. To overcome this problem we used confocal microscopy to examine the co-localization of NP with ATP1A1 and PHB in LCMV-infected cells. Weighted co-localization coefficients (CC), determined by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal, were significantly higher than non-weighted CC, indicating the presence of brighter pixels in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions (Fig 4) .
The cardiac glycoside ouabain is an inhibitor of ATP1A1 that has been used to treat congestive heart failure in European countries [41] . The PHB inhibitor rocaglamide is a flavagline from an Aglaia tree used in traditional Chinese medicine [42] that has potent anticancer activity [43] . To examine whether pharmacological inhibition of ATP1A1 or PHB inhibited LCMV multiplication, we pretreated human (A549 and HEK 293T), nonhuman primate (Vero E6), and rodent (murine L929 and hamster BHK-21) cells with ouabain or rocaglamide and infected them with rLCMV/eGFP (S1 Fig). Ouabain treatment resulted in a strong dosedependent inhibition of eGFP expression in infected human-and nonhuman primate cells, but did not affect eGFP expression intensity in infected rodent cells (S1A Fig) . This finding is consistent with rodents expressing an ATP1A1 allele that is resistant to ouabain inhibition [44] .
Likewise, we observed a dose-dependent rocaglamide inhibition of eGFP expression in all cell lines infected with rLCMV/eGFP (S1B Fig) . Consistent with these findings, production of infectious LCMV progeny was reduced by treatment with either ouabain or rocaglamide ( Fig 5A) within a concentration range that had minimal impact on cell viability (Fig 5B) . To examine the correlation between efficacy and cytotoxicity of these compounds, we determined their therapeutic index (TI = CC 50 /IC 50 (Fig 5Bi) ; whereas rocaglamide had TIs of >105 (CC 50 > 1000 nM, IC 50 = 9.51 nM) and 10.3 (CC 50 = 100 nM, IC 50 = 9.75 nM) in A549 and Vero E6 cells, respectively (Fig 5Bii) . Moreover, the ATP1A1 antagonist inhibitor, bufalin, also exhibited robust anti-LCMV activity with TIs of 8.92 (CC 50 Heat shock protein HSP 90-alpha HSP90AA1 P07900 8 10 9
Endoplasmin HSP90B1 P14625 9 9 9
Large neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1 SLC7A5 Q01650 6 12 9
Keratin, type II cuticular Hb1 KRT81 Q14533 10 8 9
Putative helicase MOV-10 MOV10 Q9HCE1 8 10 9
Microtubule-associated protein 1B MAP1B P46821 6 11 8.5
Spectrin beta chain, rocaglamide (100 nM) (Fig 5C) , further supporting a specific anti-LCMV activity of ouabain and rocaglamide that was not due to reduced cell viability.
To gain insights about the mechanisms by which ouabain and rocaglamide exert their anti-LCMV activity, we examined effects of these compounds on distinct steps of the LCMV life cycle. First, we asked whether ouabain and rocaglamide affected cell entry of LCMV. We conducted time-of-addition experiments in which we treated cells with ouabain or rocaglamide prior to virus inoculation (-1.5 h), at the time of inoculation (0 h), or 1.5 h pi (+1.5 h) (Fig 6A) .
In some samples, we used ammonium chloride starting at 4 h pi to block multiple rounds of virus infection. The timing of compound addition did not significantly change the number of eGFP-positive cells, indicating that neither ouabain nor rocaglamide inhibited cell entry of LCMV. The number of eGFP + cells in ouabain-treated cells was reduced at all time-of-addition points compared to vehicle dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-treated cells, but was similar to that observed in ammonium chloride-treated cells. Thus, ouabain did not inhibit LCMV RNA replication and gene expression, but rather a late step of the LCMV life cycle. In contrast, rocaglamide treatment resulted in a negligible number of eGFP + cells, indicating that rocaglamide inhibited virus RNA replication and gene transcription.
To further investigate the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis, we infected A549 cells with a recombinant single-cycle infectious LCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) and treated cells with either ouabain or rocaglamide. Seventy-two hours later, we determined percent normalized eGFP expression in infected cells (Fig 6B) . Consistent with our results from the time-of-addition experiment, ouabain did not affect reporter eGFP expression. However, rocaglamide reduced eGFP expression, confirming inhibitory effect of rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis.
We also examined the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on the late step of the arenavirus life cycle, Z-mediated budding. For this experiment, we transfected cells with Z-Strep-and Z-FLAG (DYKDDDDK epitope)-expressing plasmids from LCMV and LASV, respectively. At 24 h post-transfection, we removed the tissue culture supernatant (TCS) and washed extensively transfected cells to eliminate already budded Z. We cultured the transfected cells in the presence or absence of ouabain or rocaglamide. At 24 h, we determined by WB levels of Z protein in both whole cell lysates and associated with virus-like particles (VLPs) collected from TCS. Treatment with rocaglamide, but not with ouabain, caused a reduction in both LCMV and LASV Z budding efficiency (Fig 6C and 6D) . The reproducibility of these findings was confirmed based on results from four independent experiments (Fig 6E) . We also examined whether ouabain could interfere with a step of assembly of infectious progeny that was not captured by the Z budding assay through two additional experiments. The first experiment involved the use of a newly generated single-cycle infectious recombinant LCMV expressing the reporter gene ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP) to infect (MOI = 0.1) A549 cells (1 st infection). These cells were subsequently transfected with a plasmid expressing LCMV GPC. After 24 h, we used TCS to infect a fresh cell monolayer (2 nd infection) and identified infected cells based on ZsGreen expression. To assess the effect of ouabain on de novo assembly of infectious progeny we determined normalized ratios (2 nd /1 st infection) of ZsGreen + cells (Fig 6F) . The second experiment involved infection (MOI = 0.1) of cells with WT LCMV, and 48 h later we washed infected cells three times to remove the extracellular infectious progeny produced during the first 48 h of infection. Then, fresh media containing ouabain or DMSO vehicle control were added, and 24 h later we determined virus titers in TCS (Fig 6G) . Results from both experiments consistently showed that ouabain did not inhibit assembly de novo of extracellular infectious virus.
Combination therapy can significantly alleviate the problem posed by the rapid emergence of drug-resistant variants commonly observed during monotherapy strategies to control RNA virus infections. Since ouabain and rocaglamide inhibited different steps of the LCMV life cycle, we examined whether their use in combination results in a synergistic anti-LCMV effect. For this experiment, we infected A549 cells with rLCMV/eGFP and treated them with ouabain and rocaglamide using different concentrations and combinations. At 48 h pi, we determined percent eGFP expression (Fig 7) . Combination treatment with ouabain and rocaglamide resulted in synergistic anti-LCMV activity that was enhanced under conditions using higher concentrations of ouabain and lower concentrations of rocaglamide.
We next asked whether the ATP1A1 and PHB host-cell factors contributed also to multiplication of viral hemorrhagic fever-causing LASV. We treated A549 cells with ouabain, bufalin, or rocaglamide and inoculated the treated cells with recombinant LASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP). eGFP expression was examined 48 h later. Similar to rLCMV infection, LASV multiplication was restricted in ouabain-, bufalin-, or rocaglamide-treated cells at concentrations minimally impacting cell viability, although their IC 50 values were slightly higher than those found with the LCMV infection system (Fig 5B and S2 Fig) as ouabain had IC 50 of 9.34 nM, bufalin had IC 50 of 1.66 nM and rocaglamide had IC 50 of 37.0 nM (Fig 8) . We also tested the effect of compounds targeting ATP1A1 and PHB on multiplication of JUNV. Consistent with our results obtained with LCMV and LASV, ouabain, bufalin, and rocaglamide strongly suppressed JUNV multiplication (S3 Fig). These findings indicate that ATP1A1 and PHB function as pro-viral factors of a range of mammarenaviruses.
We identified ATP1A1 and PHB as novel host-cell proteins that contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses. Our approach using a recombinant LCMV expressing NP with an affinity tag facilitated defining the NP interactome in the context of LCMV infection. Recently, using an NP-specific monoclonal antibody (mAb) to precipitate NP and associated cellular protein partners in a mammarenavirus NP interactome, King et al. identified 348 host proteins that associated with LCMV NP [45] . We found 99 common proteins between our filtered LCMV NP interactome of 171 proteins and the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. Differences in both experimental conditions and analysis methodologies used to generate the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. and ours likely h post-transfection, cells were washed with fresh media to eliminate Z-mediated production of VLPs in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain or Roc-A at the indicated concentrations. VLPs present in TCS were collected by ultracentrifugation, and cell lysates were prepared. Z protein expression in VLPs and cell lysates were determined by western blots using antibodies to Strep-tag (C) and FLAG-tag (D). Budding efficiency for each sample was estimated by dividing the signal intensity of the Z protein associated with VLPs by that of Z detected in the cell lysate. Numbers on the bottom of panel C correspond to LCMV Z budding efficiencies determined in a representative experiment. Results shown in panel E correspond to the average and SD from four independent experiments including the one shown in panel D. The mean budding efficiency of DMSO treatedsamples was set to 100%. Data represent mean ± SD of four independent experiments. (F) Effect of ouabain on incorporation of viral glycoprotein into virions. 293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with scrLCMV/ZsG (1 st infection) for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were washed with fresh medium to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain at 40 nM (OUA). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayer of BHK-21 cells (2 nd infection) seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. ZsGreen signal intensity was measured by a fluorescent plate reader. GP-incorporation efficiency was estimated by dividing ZsGreen signal intensity in BHK-21 cell lysate (2 nd ) by that in 293T cell lysate (1 st ). The mean GP-incorporation efficiency of DMSO treated samples was set to 100%. Data represent means ± SD from three independent experiments. contributed to the observed differences between data sets. Despite progress in the implementation of global proteomics-based screens to identify virus-host protein-protein interactions, overlap between datasets for the same viral system is usually limited. However, the substantial overlap of 99 of the 171 NP-interacting proteins from both studies supports the overall reliability of both systems. We used results of the eGFP-Strep interactome, determined in r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, as a control to filter out non-specific NP interactions, which may have resulted in a higher degree of stringency than in the study by King et al for selection of NP-interacting candidates. The combined information provided by the NP interactome reported by King et al. and the one we present in this work, will facilitate future studies to further characterize the functional and biological implications of NP-host cell interacting proteins.
All tested mammarenavirus NPs, with exception of the NP from TCRV, blocked IRF-3-dependent IFN-I induction [25, 46] . The anti-IFN activity of NP was mapped to its C-terminal part and linked to the 3'-5' exonuclease domain present with the NP C-terminal part [30] . Inhibitor-B kinase ε (IKKε) was identified as an NP-binding protein using plasmid-mediated overexpression in transfected cells [47] , and the NP-IKKε binding affinity correlated with NP's ability to inhibit IFN-I induction [47] . We, as well as the work by King et al. [45] , did not detect this NP-IKKε interaction. This discrepancy may have been caused by very low expression of IKKε in LCMV-infected cells, which prevented detection of IKKε by LC-MS/MS. Alternatively, NP-IKKε interaction could possibility be temporarily regulated and take place at early times pi, but could be mostly absent at 48 h pi, the time at which we prepared the cell lysates for our proteomics studies. Future studies comparing the NP interactome at different times during infection will contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics of NP/hostcell protein interactions.
Na + /K + -ATPase is a well-characterized membrane ion transporter and is composed of two functional subunits (α and β) and one regulatory γ subunit [48] . ATP1A1 represents one of four α subunits [49, 50] . Recent evidence has suggested that the Na + /K + -ATPase is involved in multiple cell signaling pathways that are independent of its ion-pumping function [51] . Cardiac glycoside inhibitors of the Na + /K + -ATPase (NKA), so-called cardiotonic steroids (CST; e.g., ouabain, bufalin), have been shown to inhibit multiplication of different viruses including Ebola virus [35], coronaviruses [36], herpes simplex virus 1 [52, 53] , CHIKV [54] , human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) [55] , adenovirus [56] and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 1 [57] .
Different mechanisms are likely to contribute to the antiviral activity of CSTs, including altered cell functions modulated by the signaling activity of Na + /K + -ATPase [58] . Thus, a low concentration of ouabain induces a conformational change in ATP1A1 that results in activation and release of proto-oncogene tyrosine protein kinase, Src, from ATP1A1, followed by activation of as yet unknown downstream signaling that inhibits, for instance, cell entry of murine hepatitis virus (MHV) [59] . However, our results indicated that ouabain did not interfere with LCMV cell entry. In addition, treatment with the Src inhibitor 4-amino-5-(4-methylphenyl)-7-(t-butyl)pyrazolo [3,4-d] pyrimidine (PP1) did not counteract the anti-LCMV activity of ouabain (S4 Fig). Nevertheless, ATP1A1-mediated Src signaling could plausibly contribute to the inhibitory effect of ouabain on JUNV multiplication as similarly to that observed with MHV. Moreover, cell entry of JUNV occurs also by clathrin-mediated endocytosis [60] , a process affected by Src signaling. Ouabain has been clinically used in several European countries for the management of congestive heart failure, whereas bufalin has been tested in clinical trials for cancer treatments [61] , and the CST digoxin has been FDA-approved since 1997 to treat heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Hence, opportunities for the repurposing CSTs have potential as therapeutics to treat infections caused by viral hemorrhagic fever-causing arenaviruses.
The PHB inhibitor, rocaglamide, appeared to interfere with LCMV RNA synthesis and budding, but did not affect LCMV cell entry. In contrast, PHB was reported to be a cell entry receptor for DENV-2 [39] and CHIKV [40] . On the other hand, PHB did not act as a virus cell entry receptor for HCV. Rather, PHB contributed to HCV cell entry through binding to cellular RAF (c-Raf; proto-oncogene serine/threonine-protein kinase) and subsequent Harvey rat sarcoma proto-oncogene (HRas) activation that induces a signal transduction pathway required for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mediated HCV cell entry [37] . In addition, siRNA-mediated kd of PHB decreased production of H5N1 FLUAV [38] . These findings indicate that PHB is involved in different steps of the life cycle of a variety of viruses, and thereby an attractive target for the development of broad-spectrum antiviral drugs.
Rocaglate is a group of natural compounds, which includes rocaglamide, that inhibits protein synthesis by targeting the ATP-dependent DEAD-box RNA helicase eukaryotic initiation factor 4A (eIF4A) and exerts anti-tumor activity [62, 63] . The rocaglate compound, silvestrol, inhibits Ebola virus multiplication likely by interfering with the role of eIF4A in viral protein translation [64] .
While we focused on two host proteins, ATP1A1 and PHB, in this study, our proteomics approach also identified several NP-interacting host-cell proteins whose kd expression via siRNA resulted in increased LCMV multiplication. These proteins, which included MAP1B, might have anti-LCMV activity. MAP1B has been shown to bind to nonstructural proteins 1 (NS1) and 2 (NS2) of human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) [34] . NS1 and NS2 of HRSV antagonizes host IFN-I response by reducing the levels of TNF receptor associated factor (TRAF3), IKKε (NS1), and STAT2 (NS2) [65] . NS2-MAP1B interaction interfered with HRSV NS2's ability to reduce levels of STAT2, whereas the role of NS1-MAP1B interaction remains to be determined [34] . Examining the role of NP-MAP1B interaction in modulating NP's ability to inhibit induction of type I IFN is of interest.
We identified among the NP-interacting host cell proteins the RNA helicase Moloney leukemia virus 10 (MOV10), which has been reported to be an antiviral factor for FLUAV [66] , retroviruses [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] , and DENV-2 [72] . We did not observe increased LCMV multiplication in cells subjected to siRNA-mediated kd of MOV10, a finding that would question an anti-LCMV activity of MOV10. However, we consider that LCMV has already optimal multiplication in A549 cells and further increases may occur only under rather unique conditions. MOV10 was shown to enhance IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction following SeV infection through a tank binding kinase 1 (TBK1)-independent and IKKε-dependent manner. This finding was further supported by demonstrating MOV10-IKKε interaction by co-immunoprecipitation studies [73] . We documented that the anti-IFN activity of mammarenavirus NP correlated with its ability to interact with IKKε [47] . Whether NP-MOV10 interaction prevents MOV10 from enhancing IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction remains to be determined.
Several members of the mammalian chaperonin-containing T-complex (CCT) were identified as prominent hits in our NP interactome. The mammalian CCT is critical for folding of many proteins with important functions in diverse cellular processes [74] , and may protect complex protein topologies within its central cavity during biosynthesis and folding [75] . The contribution of CCT members to NP assembly into a nucleocapsid structure could account for their presence in the NP, but not eGFP, interactome. Interestingly, members of the CCT have been implicated in multiplication of different viruses including rabies virus [76, 77] , HCV [78] and FLUAV [79] . However, the role of these CCT proteins in virus multiplication remains unknown and may involve functions other than acting as molecular chaperones.
Previous studies documented the presence of several components of the of eIF4F, including 4A, within viral replication-transcription complexes (RTC) detected in cells infected with LCMV [80] and TCRV [81] . These findings, together with the detection of a number of ribosomal proteins in the NP interactome, suggest that translation of viral mRNAs may take place within RTC. However, rocaglamide interference with the activity of eIF4A within the viral RTC might contribute to its anti-LCMV activity.
In this work, we documented the generation of rLCMV/Strep-NP and its use to define the NP-interactome in infected cells. We presented evidence that ATP1A1 and PHB contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses using genetics and pharmacological inhibition of the genes. Consistent with our findings, bioinformatic analysis revealed that the protein network associated with ATP1A1 and PHB involves host cell proteins with functions in biological processes that have been implicated in virus multiplication (S5 Fig). The overall experimental approach described here can facilitate the identification of biologically relevant NP-interacting host-cell proteins. Future studies elucidating the roles of pro-and antiviral host-cell factors identified in this study in mammarenavirus multiplication will advance our understanding of the multiple functions of NP and uncover novel cellular targets for the development of antimammarenaviral drugs. In addition, by identifying proviral host-cell factors, drugs that are already approved can be repurposing as therapeutics to combat human pathogenic mammarenavirus infections.
Baby hamster kidney BHK-21 (American Type Culture Collection, ATCC, CCL-10), house mouse L929 (ATCC CCL-1), grivet Vero E6 (ATCC CRL-1586), human A549 (ATCC CCL-185), and human HEK 293T (ATCC CRL-3216) cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) containing 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, 2 mM of L-glutamine, 100 mg/ml of streptomycin, and 100 U/ml of penicillin at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 .
WT recombinant LCMVs, Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and clone-13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains, were generated as described [30, 82, 83] . Generation of rLCMV/NP(D382A) and SeV, strain Cantell, was described [30, 82, 83 ]. An rLCMV lacking GPC and expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) was generated by reverse genetics using procedures previously described [84] . rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep were generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate WT rLCMV and tri-segmented LCMV (r3LCMV) expressing eGFP [30] . For the generation of these novel rLCMVs, we created pol1S Cl-13 plasmids that directed Pol1-mediated intracellular synthesis of recombinant LCMV S genome RNA species coding for Strep-tagged NP or eGFP, respectively (Fig 1A and 1B) . The rLCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMV/eGFP) was generated as described [85] , and the rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (rLCMV/ZsG) instead of eGFP was generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMV/eGFP. Generation of rLASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP) will be described elsewhere. A tri-segmented recombinant live-attenuated Candid #1 strain of JUNV expressing eGFP (r3JUNV/eGFP) was generated as described [86] . For the generation of a novel single cycle rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP), a pol1S plasmid was created by omitting GPC open reading frame (ORF) from pol1S plasmid used for the generation of rLCMV/ZsG. scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP was rescued by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP [84] .
LCMV titers were determined by immunofocus forming assay (IFFA) as described [87] . Briefly, 10-fold serial virus dilutions were used to infect Vero E6 cell monolayers in a 96-well plate, and at 20 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). After cell permeabilization by treatment with dilution buffer (DB) (0.3% Triton X-100 in PBS-containing 3% bovine serum albumin [BSA]), cells were stained with a rat mAb to NP (VL-4, Bio X Cell, West Lebanon, NH) conjugated with Alexa Fluor 488 (VL-4-AF488, Protein Labeling Kit, Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA). VSV titers were determined by a plaque assay.
Total cell lysates were prepared in PD lysis buffer (+) (250 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% TritonX-100, 10% glycerol, 1 mM of MgCl 2 , 1 μM of CaCl 2 , 1 μM of ZnCl 2 ) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Clarified lysates were mixed at a 1:1 ratio with loading buffer (100 mM of Tris [pH 6.8], 20% 2-mercaptoethanol, 4% SDS, 0.2% bromophenol blue, 20% glycerol) and boiled for 5 min. Proteins samples were fractionated by SDS-PAGE using 4-20% gradient polyacrylamide gels (Mini-PROTEAN TGX gels 4-20%, Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA), and proteins were transferred by electroblotting onto polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Immobilin Transfer Membranes, Millipore, Billerica, MA). To detect Strep-tagged proteins, membranes were reacted with mouse monoclonal antibodies to Strep (QIAGEN, Germantown, MD), eGFP (Takara Bio USA, Mountain View, CA), GP 2 (We33/ 36), ATP1A1 (TehrmoFisher Scientific, Rockford, IL), PHB (Abcam, Cambridge, MA) or rabbit polyclonal antibodies to α-tubulin (Cell Signaling Technologies, Danvers, MA) or glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH, Millipore), respectively, followed by incubation with appropriate horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse or anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, West Grove, PA). SuperSignal West Pico or Femto chemiluminescent substrate (Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used to elicit chemiluminescent signals that were visualized using ImageQuant LAS 4000 Imager (GE Healthcare Bio-Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA).
Pull down of strep-tagged proteins from infected cell lysate. A549 cells prepared in six 15-cm dishes (approximately 1.0 x 10 8 cells in total) were infected with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP at an MOI of 0.1. At 48 h pi, cells were washed three times with ice-cold PBS, scraped into fresh ice-cold PBS, and centrifuged at 400 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Supernatant was removed, and cells were lysed with 12 ml of PD lysis buffer (+) supplemented with halt protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktail (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and 5 μg/ml of deoxyribonuclease I (Worthington Biochemical Corporation, Lakewood, NJ). Lysate was clarified by centrifugation at 3,900 x g at 4˚C for 30 min to remove cell debris. Clarified cell lysate was then incubated with strep-tactin sepharose resin (QIAGEN) at 4˚C. After 2 h of incubation, the resin was washed three times with PD lysis buffer (+) and once with PD lysis buffer without TritonX-100 (PD lysis buffer [-] ). After the centrifugation at 1,600 x g and 4˚C for 5 min, the last wash buffer was removed, and protein complexes associated with the resin were eluted into 2 ml of PD lysis buffer (-) containing 2.5 mM of desthiobiotin. The eluate was then subjected to TCA precipitation followed by trypsin digestion.
Multidimensional protein identification technology microcolumn. A MudPIT microcolumn was prepared by first creating a Kasil frit at one end of an un-deactivated 250-μm outside diameter (OD) capillary tube (interior diameter of 360 μm)(Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA). The Kasil frit was prepared by briefly dipping a 20-30-cm capillary tube in 300 μl of Kasil 1624 potassium silicate well-mixed solution (PQ Corporation, Malvern, PA) and 100 μl of formamide, curing at 100˚C for 4 h, and cutting the frit to a length of %2 mm. Strong cation exchange particles (SCX Luna, 5-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) were packed in-house from particle slurries in methanol to 2.5 cm. Reversed phase particles (2 cm, C18 Aqua, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were then successively packed onto the capillary tube using the same method as SCX loading.
MudPIT analysis. An analytical reversed-phase liquid chromatography column was generated by pulling a 100-μm (interior diameter (ID) of 360 μm) OD capillary tube (Polymicro Technologies, Phoenix, AZ) to 5-μm ID tip. Reversed-phase particles (Luna C18, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were packed directly into the pulled column at 5.5 mPa until 15 cm long. The column was further packed, washed, and equilibrated at 10 mPa with buffer B (80% acetonitrile, 0.1% formic acid) followed by buffer A (5% acetonitrile and 0.1% formic acid). MudPIT and analytical columns were assembled using a zero-dead volume union (Upchurch Scientific, Oak Harbor, WA). LC-MS/MS analysis was performed with an Agilent high-pressure LC pump (Agilent) and linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap Orbitrap Velos (Thermo) using an in-house built electrospray stage. Electrospray was performed directly from the analytical column by applying the electrospray ionization (ESI) voltage at a tee (150 μm ID, Upchurch Scientific) directly downstream of a 1:1,000 split flow to reduce the flow rate to 300 nl/min through the columns. MudPIT experiments (10-step) were performed in which each step corresponds to 0, 10, 20, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 , and 100% buffer C (500 mM of ammonium acetate, 0.1% formic acid, and 5% acetonitrile) and was run for 3 min at the beginning of a 110-min gradient.
Data analysis. Protein and peptide identification were performed with Integrated Proteomics Pipeline-IP2 (Integrated Proteomics Applications, San Diego, CA. http://www. integratedproteomics.com/) using ProLuCID and DTASelect2 algorithms. DTASelect parameters were-p 2 -y 1-trypstat-pfp .01 -extra-pI-DB-dm-in. Spectrum raw files were extracted into ms2 files from raw files using open source RawExtract 1.9.9 (Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA; http://fields.scripps.edu/downloads.php), and the tandem mass spectra were searched against a human protein database (UniprotKB). To accurately estimate peptide probabilities and false discovery rates, we used a decoy database containing the reversed sequences of all the proteins appended to the target database. Tandem mass spectra were matched to sequences using the ProLuCID algorithm with a 600-ppm peptide mass tolerance. ProLuCID searches were done on an Intel Xeon cluster processor running under the Linux operating system. The search space included half and fully tryptic peptide candidates that fell within the mass tolerance window with no miscleavage constraint. Carbamidomethylation (+57.02146 Da) of cysteine was considered as a static modification. siRNA screening A549 cells (1,000 cells/well) in a 384-well plate were reverse transfected with 0.5 pmol of siRNA pool (S2 Table) targeting each gene using 0.1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (Thermo Fisher Scientific) (final siRNA concentration was 10 nM), followed by incubation at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 . At 72 h post-transfection, cells were infected (MOI = 0.05) with rLCMV/ZsG. siRNA target host-cell proteins were selected based on availability of validated siRNA sequences. The siRNAs we used to examine the effects on LCMV multiplication of knockdown expression of NP-interacting host cell protein candidate hits corresponded to the Genome-wide ON TAR-GET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene; Dharmacon, Lafayette, CO).
A549 cells (3.0 x 10 4 cells/well) were reverse transfected in a 24-well plate with 6 pmol of siRNA pools targeting each gene using 1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (final siRNA concentration is 10 nM). At 72 h post-transfection, total cell lysate was prepared in modified lysis A buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl [pH = 8.0], 50 mM NaCl, 1%Triton X-100, 1.25% sodium deoxycholate) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. The total protein concentration of clarified cell lysate was measured by Pierce BCA Protein Assay Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The same amount of protein from each sample was subjected to SDS-PAGE, and the protein expression of siRNA-targeted genes was analyzed by western blots.
Cells infected with eGFP-or ZsGreen-expressing rLCMV were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. After cell permeabilization by treatment with DB, cells were stained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). Green fluorescence (eGFP or ZsGreen) and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, Bio-Tek, Winooski, VT).
Mock-and virus-infected cells were fixed with 4% PFA. After cell permeabilization and blocking by treatment with DB containing 1% normal goat serum, cells were incubated with primary mouse anti ATP1A1 or PHB antibody followed by secondary anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluore 568 (anti-mouse IgG-AF568). Subsequently, cells were stained with VL-4-AF488. In some samples, primary antibody against ATP1A1 or PHB was omitted to determine background fluorescence. To visualize nuclei, DAPI Fluoromount-G (SouthernBiotech, Birmingham, AL) was used to mount coverslips on a slide glass. Stained cells were observed under a confocal microscope (LSM 710, Zeiss) and data analyzed by ZEN software (Zeiss). Co-localization analysis was performed on a pixel by pixel basis using Zen software (Zeiss). Eight green (NP-positive) cells were marked and every pixel in the marked area was plotted in the scatter diagram based on its intensity level from each channel. Thresholds for green and red channels were determined using mock-infected cells stained with VL-4-AF488 (anti-NP) and anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluor 568, without using anti-ATP1A1 or -PHB antibodies. Each pixel was assigned a value of 1. Co-localization coefficients (CC) (or non-weighted CC) were determined by dividing the sum of both green-and red-positive pixels by the sum of green positive pixels. This calculation was repeated for eight individual cells. To assess the specificity of co-localization, we determined weighted CC by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal. Comparison of non-weighted and weighted CC allowed us to determine whether brighter pixels were present in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions. p values were determined by a two-tailed paired t test using GraphPad Prism software.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 2 h, followed by infection with rLCMV/eGFP (MOI = 0.01). Compounds were present to study endpoint. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS, and eGFP expression was examined by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated and rLCMV/eGFP-infected cells were set to 100%. The IC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded in a 96-well plate (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions and cultured at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 48 h. Then, CellTiter 96 AQ ueous one solution reagent (Promega, Madison, WI) was added. Thereafter, the assay was performed according to the manufacturer's recommendations, and the absorbance (490 nm) was obtained using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) reader (SPECTRA max plus 384; Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated cells were set to 100%. The CC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A plasmid expressing C-terminus Strep-tagged Z protein (pC-LCMV-Z-Strep) was generated using similar procedure to generate a plasmid expressing C-terminus FLAG-tagged LASV Z protein (pC-LASV-Z-FLAG), and the budding assay was performed as previously described [88] . Cells (HEK 293T) in a 12-well plate were transfected with 0.5 μg of empty pCAGGS vector or pC-LCMV-Z-Strep or pC-LASV-Z-FLAG using Lipofectamine 2000. At 5 h post-transfection, media were replaced with fresh media and incubated at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 19 h. Then the cells were three times washed with fresh medium. After the removal of the last wash medium, cells were cultured in fresh medium containing ouabain (30 or 40 nM) or rocaglamide (50 or 100 nM) or equivalent concentration of DMSO, and 24 h later, virion-like particle (VLP)-containing TCS and cells were collected. Total cell lysate was prepared by lysing the cells with lysis buffer (1% NP-40, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 62.5 mM NaCl, 0.4% sodium deoxycholate). After clarification of TCS from cell debris by centrifugation at 400 x g and 4˚C for 10 min, VLPs were collected by ultracentrifugation at 100,000 x g and 4˚C for 30 min through a 20% sucrose cushion. VLPs were resuspended in PBS, and Z expression in total cell lysate and TCS (containing VLPs) were analyzed by western blots.
A549 cells infected with rLCMV/eGFP were harvested using Accutase cell detachment solution (Innovative Cell Technologies, San Diego, CA) and fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. eGFP expression was examined by flow cytometry using a BD LSR II (Becton Dickson), and data were analyzed with FlowJo (Tree Star, Inc., Ashland, OR).
293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected with scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were three times washed with fresh media to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of 40 nM of ouabain or vehicle control (DMSO). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayers of BHK-21 cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. Total cell lysate was prepared in cell lysis buffer (150 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% [NP-40], 1 mM of EDTA] and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. ZsGreen signal intensity in clarified cell lysate was measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek).
A549 cells seeded (2 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with combinations of different concentrations of ouabain and rocaglamide for 2 h and then infected (MOI = 0.01) with rLCMV/eGFP. Compounds were present in the culture medium throughout the experiment. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed, permeabilized by treatment with DB, and stained with DAPI. eGFP and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). eGFP readouts were normalized by DAPI readouts, and normalized data were used to analyze synergistic effect of the two compounds by the MacSynergy II program [89] .
Data were analyzed for p values by a two-tailed unpaired t test using GraphPad Prism software. | For how long were the cells infected before analysis? | 5,154 | 48 h | 7,152 |
1,687 | Interactome analysis of the lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus nucleoprotein in infected cells reveals ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit Alpha 1 and prohibitin as host-cell factors involved in the life cycle of mammarenaviruses
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834214/
SHA: efbd0dfc426da5dd25ce29411d6fa37571623773
Authors: Iwasaki, Masaharu; Minder, Petra; Caì, Yíngyún; Kuhn, Jens H.; Yates, John R.; Torbett, Bruce E.; de la Torre, Juan C.
Date: 2018-02-20
DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892
License: cc0
Abstract: Several mammalian arenaviruses (mammarenaviruses) cause hemorrhagic fevers in humans and pose serious public health concerns in their endemic regions. Additionally, mounting evidence indicates that the worldwide-distributed, prototypic mammarenavirus, lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance. Concerns about human-pathogenic mammarenaviruses are exacerbated by of the lack of licensed vaccines, and current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to off-label use of ribavirin that is only partially effective. Detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions may facilitate the development of novel anti-mammarenavirus strategies by targeting components of the host-cell machinery that are required for efficient virus multiplication. Here we document the generation of a recombinant LCMV encoding a nucleoprotein (NP) containing an affinity tag (rLCMV/Strep-NP) and its use to capture the NP-interactome in infected cells. Our proteomic approach combined with genetics and pharmacological validation assays identified ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit alpha 1 (ATP1A1) and prohibitin (PHB) as pro-viral factors. Cell-based assays revealed that ATP1A1 and PHB are involved in different steps of the virus life cycle. Accordingly, we observed a synergistic inhibitory effect on LCMV multiplication with a combination of ATP1A1 and PHB inhibitors. We show that ATP1A1 inhibitors suppress multiplication of Lassa virus and Candid#1, a live-attenuated vaccine strain of Junín virus, suggesting that the requirement of ATP1A1 in virus multiplication is conserved among genetically distantly related mammarenaviruses. Our findings suggest that clinically approved inhibitors of ATP1A1, like digoxin, could be repurposed to treat infections by mammarenaviruses pathogenic for humans.
Text: Introduction Mammarenaviruses (Arenaviridae: Mammarenavirus) cause chronic infections of rodents worldwide [1] . Invasion of human dwellings by infected rodents can result in human infections through mucosal exposure to aerosols or by direct contact of abraded skin with infectious material. Several mammarenaviruses cause viral hemorrhagic fevers (VHFs) in humans and pose important public health problems in their endemic areas [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] . Mammarenaviruses are classified into two main groups, Old World (OW) and New World (NW) [1] . The OW Lassa virus (LASV), causative agent of Lassa fever (LF), is the most significant OW mammarenaviral pathogen. LASV is estimated to infect several hundred thousand individuals annually in Western Africa, resulting in a high number of LF cases associated with high morbidity and lethality. Moreover, LASV endemic regions are expanding [7] , and the association of the recently identified mammarenavirus Lujo virus with a VHF outbreak in Southern Africa [8, 9] has raised concerns about the emergence of novel VHF-causing mammarenaviruses. The most significant NW mammarenavirus is Junín virus (JUNV), which causes Argentinian hemorrhagic fever [10] . The worldwide-distributed OW mammarenavirus lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance especially in congenital infections [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] . Moreover, LCMV poses a particular threat to immunocompromised individuals, as has been illustrated by fatal cases of LCMV infection associated with organ transplants [16, 17] . However, LCMV research can be safely performed at BSL-2 containment, rather than the BSL-4 containment necessary for live LASV or JUNV research [18] .
No US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-licensed vaccines are available for the treatment of arenavirus infections, although a live attenuated vaccine strain of JUNV, Candid#1, is licensed in Argentina. Likewise, current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to an offlabel use of the nucleoside analogue ribavirin that is only partially effective and can cause significant side effects [19] [20] [21] . Development of effective anti-mammarenavirus drugs has been hampered by the lack of detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions required for mammarenavirus multiplication that could represent amenable targets for antiviral therapy. the potential problem that overexpression of a single viral gene product may potentiate PPI interactions that are not relevant during the course of a natural virus infection. To overcome this issue, we designed a recombinant LCMV (rLCMV) encoding a tandem [WSHPQFEK (GGGS) 3 WSHPQFEK] Strep-tag fused to the amino-terminus of NP (rLCMV/Strep-NP) (Fig 1A and 1B) . To facilitate the identification of specific PPI between NP and host cell proteins, we used our mammarenavirus tri-segmented (r3) platform [30] to design an r3LCMV expressing a C-terminus Strep-tag version of enhanced green fluorescent protein (r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep) that we used as a negative control (Fig 1A and 1B) . We rescued rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep and confirmed the expression of strep-tagged NP and eGFP in rLCMV/ Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, respectively (Fig 1C) . Next, we examined the growth properties of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep in three different cells lines from hamsters, humans, and nonhuman primates (BHK-21, A549, and Vero E6 cells, respectively) (Fig 1D) . The fitness of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep was modestly decreased compared to that observed with wild-type (WT) Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and Clone 13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains of LCMV. However, both rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep had WT-like growth kinetics and reached high titers. As with WT LCMV, infection with rLCMV/Strep-NP prevented production of bioactive IFN-I by cells in response to Sendai virus (SeV) infection as determined using an IFN bioassay based on protection against the cytopathic effect (CPE) induced by infection with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) (Fig 1E) . Vero cells treated for 16 h with tissue cultured supernatants (TCS) from A549 cells infected first with WT LCMV or rLCMV/Strep, followed by 24 h infection with SeV, remained fully susceptible to VSV-induced CPE. In contrast, Vero cells treated with TCS from A549 cells infected with rLCMV/NP(D382A), a mutant unable to prevent induction of IFN-I [30] , and subsequently with SeV, were protected against VSV induced CPE.
We selected the human A549 cell line because lung epithelial cells are one of the initial cell targets of humans following inhalation of mammarenavirions. We infected A549 cells (multiplicity of infection [MOI] = 0.1) with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep (Fig 2A) . At 48 h post-inoculation (pi), we prepared total cell lysates for pull-down (PD) assays using a sepharose resin coated with strep-tactin. Aliquots of the protein complexes present in the PD samples were fractionated by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) (Fig 2B) followed by SYPRO Ruby protein gel staining. We compared the pattern of stained protein bands detected between rLCMV/Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strepinfected samples and confirmed the presence of Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep in pertinent samples (Fig 2B) . Protein complexes in the rest of eluates from the PD samples were concentrated by trichloroacetic acid (TCA) precipitation and subjected to trypsin digestion (Fig 2A) . Digested peptides were subjected to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) analysis using a hybrid mass spectrometer consisting of linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap (LTQ) Velos and an Orbitrap analyser.
We classified host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS analysis from two independent biological replicates into two groups: 1) proteins found only in Strep-NP PD samples with at least five spectral counts ( Table 1) , and 2) proteins found in both Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep PD samples with five or higher spectral counts in Strep-NP samples and at least 2-fold higher spectral counts in Strep-NP PD compared to eGFP PD samples ( Table 2) . Filtering the data using these criteria resulted in identification of 139 candidate host-cell proteins as NP-interacting partners. Among 53 proteins found present in both NP-and eGFP-PD samples, 36 had spectral counts in the NP-PD sample that were less than two-fold higher than their corresponding spectral counts in the eGFP-PD sample (Fig 2C and S1 Table) . Based on the criteria we described above, we considered these proteins to be highly unlikely specific NPinteractors with an involvement in the LCMV life cycle, and therefore we did not consider these hits for further analysis. However, we acknowledge that we cannot formally rule out that some of these hits could still play a role on the life cycle of LCMV.
The protein annotation through evolutionary relationship (PANTHER) protein family classification (Biological Process) of the NP-interacting protein candidates revealed that a large number of proteins were involved in metabolic and cellular processes (Fig 2D) . We also analyzed the molecular functions of the NP-interacting protein candidates according to the PAN-THER protein profile classification (Fig 2E) , which revealed diversified biochemical functions enriched for nucleic acid-binding proteins and chaperones.
To initially assess pro-or anti-viral roles of NP-interacting host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS, we examined the effect of small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated knockdown (kd) of each of the corresponding genes on multiplication of rLCMV expressing reporter gene ZsGreen (ZsG) in A549 cells (Fig 3A) . The siRNAs we used were from the genome-wide ON TARGET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene). OTPs are latest generation of siRNAs and offer significant advantages over previous generations. Off-target effects are primarily driven by antisense strand microRNA (miR)-like seed activity. In OTPs, the sense strand is modified to favor antisense strand uptake whereas the antisense strand seed region is modified to drastically reduce seed-related off-targeting [33] . In addition, OTPs are designed on the foundation of the SMARTselection algorithm (Dharmacon), widely considered to be the best algorithm for rational siRNA design strategy. Numerous host-cell factors showed an anti-LCMV effect (increased ZsG expression by kd of the genes), including microtubule-associated protein 1B (MAP1B) [ [38] , dengue virus 2 (DENV-2) [39] , and chikungunya virus (CHIKV) [40] .
To begin assessing the potential biological implications of the identified NP-host cell protein interactions, we selected ATP1A1 and PHB given the availability of reagents, existing knowledge about their roles in cell physiology, and evidence of participation in multiplication of other viruses. We confirmed that cells transfected with siRNA specific to ATP1A1 and PHB exhibited the predicted reduced levels in ATP1A1 and PHB protein expression (Fig 3B) . Likewise, we examined whether siRNA-mediated reduced expression levels of ZsGreen correlated with reduced LCMV progeny titers. For this, we transfected A549 cells with siRNA targeting Expression of Strep-tagged proteins. A549 cells seeded (5.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 6-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMVs. At 48 h pi, total cell lysates were prepared, and protein expression was analyzed by western blotting. (D) Growth properties of rLCMV expressing Strep-tagged proteins. BHK-21 (1.75 x 10 5 cells/well), A549 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well), or Vero E6 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well) cells seeded in 24-well plates and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.01) with the indicated rLCMVs. At the indicated times pi, TCSs were collected and virus titers determined by IFFA. Results represent means ± SD of the results of three independent experiments. (E) Lack of induction of IFN-I in cells infected with rLCMV/Strep-NP. A549 cells were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMV or mock-infected, and 36 h later infected with SeV (MOI = 1). At 24 h pi with SeV, TCS were collected and used, following virus inactivation by U.V., to treat Vero E6 cells for 16 h, followed by infection with rVSV (MOI = 0.1) [rVSV(+)] or mockinfection [rVSV (-) ]. At 24 h pi with rVSV, cells were fixed with 4% PFA and stained with crystal violet to assess rVSV-induced cytopathic effect. We used as control rLCMV/NP(D382A) that contains mutation D382A within NP, which has been shown to abrogate the NP's ability to counteract the induction of IFN-I production.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892.g001 ATP1A1 or with NC siRNA 72 h prior to infection with rLCMV/ZsG. We found that siRNAmediated kd of ATP1A1 dramatically inhibited ZsGreen expression (Fig 3Ci) , which was associated with a significant reduction of infectious LCMV progeny (Fig 3Cii) . Our attempts to see interaction between NP and ATP1A1 or NP and PHB by co-immunoprecipitation were unsuccessful. Several possibilities could account for this, including interactions of low affinity or high on/off rate or both. Another consideration is that only a minor fraction of NP might be engaged in the interaction with a given host cell protein, and therefore, detection of these interactions would require highly sensitive methods such as LC-MS/MS. To overcome this problem we used confocal microscopy to examine the co-localization of NP with ATP1A1 and PHB in LCMV-infected cells. Weighted co-localization coefficients (CC), determined by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal, were significantly higher than non-weighted CC, indicating the presence of brighter pixels in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions (Fig 4) .
The cardiac glycoside ouabain is an inhibitor of ATP1A1 that has been used to treat congestive heart failure in European countries [41] . The PHB inhibitor rocaglamide is a flavagline from an Aglaia tree used in traditional Chinese medicine [42] that has potent anticancer activity [43] . To examine whether pharmacological inhibition of ATP1A1 or PHB inhibited LCMV multiplication, we pretreated human (A549 and HEK 293T), nonhuman primate (Vero E6), and rodent (murine L929 and hamster BHK-21) cells with ouabain or rocaglamide and infected them with rLCMV/eGFP (S1 Fig). Ouabain treatment resulted in a strong dosedependent inhibition of eGFP expression in infected human-and nonhuman primate cells, but did not affect eGFP expression intensity in infected rodent cells (S1A Fig) . This finding is consistent with rodents expressing an ATP1A1 allele that is resistant to ouabain inhibition [44] .
Likewise, we observed a dose-dependent rocaglamide inhibition of eGFP expression in all cell lines infected with rLCMV/eGFP (S1B Fig) . Consistent with these findings, production of infectious LCMV progeny was reduced by treatment with either ouabain or rocaglamide ( Fig 5A) within a concentration range that had minimal impact on cell viability (Fig 5B) . To examine the correlation between efficacy and cytotoxicity of these compounds, we determined their therapeutic index (TI = CC 50 /IC 50 (Fig 5Bi) ; whereas rocaglamide had TIs of >105 (CC 50 > 1000 nM, IC 50 = 9.51 nM) and 10.3 (CC 50 = 100 nM, IC 50 = 9.75 nM) in A549 and Vero E6 cells, respectively (Fig 5Bii) . Moreover, the ATP1A1 antagonist inhibitor, bufalin, also exhibited robust anti-LCMV activity with TIs of 8.92 (CC 50 Heat shock protein HSP 90-alpha HSP90AA1 P07900 8 10 9
Endoplasmin HSP90B1 P14625 9 9 9
Large neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1 SLC7A5 Q01650 6 12 9
Keratin, type II cuticular Hb1 KRT81 Q14533 10 8 9
Putative helicase MOV-10 MOV10 Q9HCE1 8 10 9
Microtubule-associated protein 1B MAP1B P46821 6 11 8.5
Spectrin beta chain, rocaglamide (100 nM) (Fig 5C) , further supporting a specific anti-LCMV activity of ouabain and rocaglamide that was not due to reduced cell viability.
To gain insights about the mechanisms by which ouabain and rocaglamide exert their anti-LCMV activity, we examined effects of these compounds on distinct steps of the LCMV life cycle. First, we asked whether ouabain and rocaglamide affected cell entry of LCMV. We conducted time-of-addition experiments in which we treated cells with ouabain or rocaglamide prior to virus inoculation (-1.5 h), at the time of inoculation (0 h), or 1.5 h pi (+1.5 h) (Fig 6A) .
In some samples, we used ammonium chloride starting at 4 h pi to block multiple rounds of virus infection. The timing of compound addition did not significantly change the number of eGFP-positive cells, indicating that neither ouabain nor rocaglamide inhibited cell entry of LCMV. The number of eGFP + cells in ouabain-treated cells was reduced at all time-of-addition points compared to vehicle dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-treated cells, but was similar to that observed in ammonium chloride-treated cells. Thus, ouabain did not inhibit LCMV RNA replication and gene expression, but rather a late step of the LCMV life cycle. In contrast, rocaglamide treatment resulted in a negligible number of eGFP + cells, indicating that rocaglamide inhibited virus RNA replication and gene transcription.
To further investigate the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis, we infected A549 cells with a recombinant single-cycle infectious LCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) and treated cells with either ouabain or rocaglamide. Seventy-two hours later, we determined percent normalized eGFP expression in infected cells (Fig 6B) . Consistent with our results from the time-of-addition experiment, ouabain did not affect reporter eGFP expression. However, rocaglamide reduced eGFP expression, confirming inhibitory effect of rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis.
We also examined the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on the late step of the arenavirus life cycle, Z-mediated budding. For this experiment, we transfected cells with Z-Strep-and Z-FLAG (DYKDDDDK epitope)-expressing plasmids from LCMV and LASV, respectively. At 24 h post-transfection, we removed the tissue culture supernatant (TCS) and washed extensively transfected cells to eliminate already budded Z. We cultured the transfected cells in the presence or absence of ouabain or rocaglamide. At 24 h, we determined by WB levels of Z protein in both whole cell lysates and associated with virus-like particles (VLPs) collected from TCS. Treatment with rocaglamide, but not with ouabain, caused a reduction in both LCMV and LASV Z budding efficiency (Fig 6C and 6D) . The reproducibility of these findings was confirmed based on results from four independent experiments (Fig 6E) . We also examined whether ouabain could interfere with a step of assembly of infectious progeny that was not captured by the Z budding assay through two additional experiments. The first experiment involved the use of a newly generated single-cycle infectious recombinant LCMV expressing the reporter gene ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP) to infect (MOI = 0.1) A549 cells (1 st infection). These cells were subsequently transfected with a plasmid expressing LCMV GPC. After 24 h, we used TCS to infect a fresh cell monolayer (2 nd infection) and identified infected cells based on ZsGreen expression. To assess the effect of ouabain on de novo assembly of infectious progeny we determined normalized ratios (2 nd /1 st infection) of ZsGreen + cells (Fig 6F) . The second experiment involved infection (MOI = 0.1) of cells with WT LCMV, and 48 h later we washed infected cells three times to remove the extracellular infectious progeny produced during the first 48 h of infection. Then, fresh media containing ouabain or DMSO vehicle control were added, and 24 h later we determined virus titers in TCS (Fig 6G) . Results from both experiments consistently showed that ouabain did not inhibit assembly de novo of extracellular infectious virus.
Combination therapy can significantly alleviate the problem posed by the rapid emergence of drug-resistant variants commonly observed during monotherapy strategies to control RNA virus infections. Since ouabain and rocaglamide inhibited different steps of the LCMV life cycle, we examined whether their use in combination results in a synergistic anti-LCMV effect. For this experiment, we infected A549 cells with rLCMV/eGFP and treated them with ouabain and rocaglamide using different concentrations and combinations. At 48 h pi, we determined percent eGFP expression (Fig 7) . Combination treatment with ouabain and rocaglamide resulted in synergistic anti-LCMV activity that was enhanced under conditions using higher concentrations of ouabain and lower concentrations of rocaglamide.
We next asked whether the ATP1A1 and PHB host-cell factors contributed also to multiplication of viral hemorrhagic fever-causing LASV. We treated A549 cells with ouabain, bufalin, or rocaglamide and inoculated the treated cells with recombinant LASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP). eGFP expression was examined 48 h later. Similar to rLCMV infection, LASV multiplication was restricted in ouabain-, bufalin-, or rocaglamide-treated cells at concentrations minimally impacting cell viability, although their IC 50 values were slightly higher than those found with the LCMV infection system (Fig 5B and S2 Fig) as ouabain had IC 50 of 9.34 nM, bufalin had IC 50 of 1.66 nM and rocaglamide had IC 50 of 37.0 nM (Fig 8) . We also tested the effect of compounds targeting ATP1A1 and PHB on multiplication of JUNV. Consistent with our results obtained with LCMV and LASV, ouabain, bufalin, and rocaglamide strongly suppressed JUNV multiplication (S3 Fig). These findings indicate that ATP1A1 and PHB function as pro-viral factors of a range of mammarenaviruses.
We identified ATP1A1 and PHB as novel host-cell proteins that contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses. Our approach using a recombinant LCMV expressing NP with an affinity tag facilitated defining the NP interactome in the context of LCMV infection. Recently, using an NP-specific monoclonal antibody (mAb) to precipitate NP and associated cellular protein partners in a mammarenavirus NP interactome, King et al. identified 348 host proteins that associated with LCMV NP [45] . We found 99 common proteins between our filtered LCMV NP interactome of 171 proteins and the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. Differences in both experimental conditions and analysis methodologies used to generate the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. and ours likely h post-transfection, cells were washed with fresh media to eliminate Z-mediated production of VLPs in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain or Roc-A at the indicated concentrations. VLPs present in TCS were collected by ultracentrifugation, and cell lysates were prepared. Z protein expression in VLPs and cell lysates were determined by western blots using antibodies to Strep-tag (C) and FLAG-tag (D). Budding efficiency for each sample was estimated by dividing the signal intensity of the Z protein associated with VLPs by that of Z detected in the cell lysate. Numbers on the bottom of panel C correspond to LCMV Z budding efficiencies determined in a representative experiment. Results shown in panel E correspond to the average and SD from four independent experiments including the one shown in panel D. The mean budding efficiency of DMSO treatedsamples was set to 100%. Data represent mean ± SD of four independent experiments. (F) Effect of ouabain on incorporation of viral glycoprotein into virions. 293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with scrLCMV/ZsG (1 st infection) for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were washed with fresh medium to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain at 40 nM (OUA). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayer of BHK-21 cells (2 nd infection) seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. ZsGreen signal intensity was measured by a fluorescent plate reader. GP-incorporation efficiency was estimated by dividing ZsGreen signal intensity in BHK-21 cell lysate (2 nd ) by that in 293T cell lysate (1 st ). The mean GP-incorporation efficiency of DMSO treated samples was set to 100%. Data represent means ± SD from three independent experiments. contributed to the observed differences between data sets. Despite progress in the implementation of global proteomics-based screens to identify virus-host protein-protein interactions, overlap between datasets for the same viral system is usually limited. However, the substantial overlap of 99 of the 171 NP-interacting proteins from both studies supports the overall reliability of both systems. We used results of the eGFP-Strep interactome, determined in r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, as a control to filter out non-specific NP interactions, which may have resulted in a higher degree of stringency than in the study by King et al for selection of NP-interacting candidates. The combined information provided by the NP interactome reported by King et al. and the one we present in this work, will facilitate future studies to further characterize the functional and biological implications of NP-host cell interacting proteins.
All tested mammarenavirus NPs, with exception of the NP from TCRV, blocked IRF-3-dependent IFN-I induction [25, 46] . The anti-IFN activity of NP was mapped to its C-terminal part and linked to the 3'-5' exonuclease domain present with the NP C-terminal part [30] . Inhibitor-B kinase ε (IKKε) was identified as an NP-binding protein using plasmid-mediated overexpression in transfected cells [47] , and the NP-IKKε binding affinity correlated with NP's ability to inhibit IFN-I induction [47] . We, as well as the work by King et al. [45] , did not detect this NP-IKKε interaction. This discrepancy may have been caused by very low expression of IKKε in LCMV-infected cells, which prevented detection of IKKε by LC-MS/MS. Alternatively, NP-IKKε interaction could possibility be temporarily regulated and take place at early times pi, but could be mostly absent at 48 h pi, the time at which we prepared the cell lysates for our proteomics studies. Future studies comparing the NP interactome at different times during infection will contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics of NP/hostcell protein interactions.
Na + /K + -ATPase is a well-characterized membrane ion transporter and is composed of two functional subunits (α and β) and one regulatory γ subunit [48] . ATP1A1 represents one of four α subunits [49, 50] . Recent evidence has suggested that the Na + /K + -ATPase is involved in multiple cell signaling pathways that are independent of its ion-pumping function [51] . Cardiac glycoside inhibitors of the Na + /K + -ATPase (NKA), so-called cardiotonic steroids (CST; e.g., ouabain, bufalin), have been shown to inhibit multiplication of different viruses including Ebola virus [35], coronaviruses [36], herpes simplex virus 1 [52, 53] , CHIKV [54] , human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) [55] , adenovirus [56] and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 1 [57] .
Different mechanisms are likely to contribute to the antiviral activity of CSTs, including altered cell functions modulated by the signaling activity of Na + /K + -ATPase [58] . Thus, a low concentration of ouabain induces a conformational change in ATP1A1 that results in activation and release of proto-oncogene tyrosine protein kinase, Src, from ATP1A1, followed by activation of as yet unknown downstream signaling that inhibits, for instance, cell entry of murine hepatitis virus (MHV) [59] . However, our results indicated that ouabain did not interfere with LCMV cell entry. In addition, treatment with the Src inhibitor 4-amino-5-(4-methylphenyl)-7-(t-butyl)pyrazolo [3,4-d] pyrimidine (PP1) did not counteract the anti-LCMV activity of ouabain (S4 Fig). Nevertheless, ATP1A1-mediated Src signaling could plausibly contribute to the inhibitory effect of ouabain on JUNV multiplication as similarly to that observed with MHV. Moreover, cell entry of JUNV occurs also by clathrin-mediated endocytosis [60] , a process affected by Src signaling. Ouabain has been clinically used in several European countries for the management of congestive heart failure, whereas bufalin has been tested in clinical trials for cancer treatments [61] , and the CST digoxin has been FDA-approved since 1997 to treat heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Hence, opportunities for the repurposing CSTs have potential as therapeutics to treat infections caused by viral hemorrhagic fever-causing arenaviruses.
The PHB inhibitor, rocaglamide, appeared to interfere with LCMV RNA synthesis and budding, but did not affect LCMV cell entry. In contrast, PHB was reported to be a cell entry receptor for DENV-2 [39] and CHIKV [40] . On the other hand, PHB did not act as a virus cell entry receptor for HCV. Rather, PHB contributed to HCV cell entry through binding to cellular RAF (c-Raf; proto-oncogene serine/threonine-protein kinase) and subsequent Harvey rat sarcoma proto-oncogene (HRas) activation that induces a signal transduction pathway required for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mediated HCV cell entry [37] . In addition, siRNA-mediated kd of PHB decreased production of H5N1 FLUAV [38] . These findings indicate that PHB is involved in different steps of the life cycle of a variety of viruses, and thereby an attractive target for the development of broad-spectrum antiviral drugs.
Rocaglate is a group of natural compounds, which includes rocaglamide, that inhibits protein synthesis by targeting the ATP-dependent DEAD-box RNA helicase eukaryotic initiation factor 4A (eIF4A) and exerts anti-tumor activity [62, 63] . The rocaglate compound, silvestrol, inhibits Ebola virus multiplication likely by interfering with the role of eIF4A in viral protein translation [64] .
While we focused on two host proteins, ATP1A1 and PHB, in this study, our proteomics approach also identified several NP-interacting host-cell proteins whose kd expression via siRNA resulted in increased LCMV multiplication. These proteins, which included MAP1B, might have anti-LCMV activity. MAP1B has been shown to bind to nonstructural proteins 1 (NS1) and 2 (NS2) of human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) [34] . NS1 and NS2 of HRSV antagonizes host IFN-I response by reducing the levels of TNF receptor associated factor (TRAF3), IKKε (NS1), and STAT2 (NS2) [65] . NS2-MAP1B interaction interfered with HRSV NS2's ability to reduce levels of STAT2, whereas the role of NS1-MAP1B interaction remains to be determined [34] . Examining the role of NP-MAP1B interaction in modulating NP's ability to inhibit induction of type I IFN is of interest.
We identified among the NP-interacting host cell proteins the RNA helicase Moloney leukemia virus 10 (MOV10), which has been reported to be an antiviral factor for FLUAV [66] , retroviruses [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] , and DENV-2 [72] . We did not observe increased LCMV multiplication in cells subjected to siRNA-mediated kd of MOV10, a finding that would question an anti-LCMV activity of MOV10. However, we consider that LCMV has already optimal multiplication in A549 cells and further increases may occur only under rather unique conditions. MOV10 was shown to enhance IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction following SeV infection through a tank binding kinase 1 (TBK1)-independent and IKKε-dependent manner. This finding was further supported by demonstrating MOV10-IKKε interaction by co-immunoprecipitation studies [73] . We documented that the anti-IFN activity of mammarenavirus NP correlated with its ability to interact with IKKε [47] . Whether NP-MOV10 interaction prevents MOV10 from enhancing IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction remains to be determined.
Several members of the mammalian chaperonin-containing T-complex (CCT) were identified as prominent hits in our NP interactome. The mammalian CCT is critical for folding of many proteins with important functions in diverse cellular processes [74] , and may protect complex protein topologies within its central cavity during biosynthesis and folding [75] . The contribution of CCT members to NP assembly into a nucleocapsid structure could account for their presence in the NP, but not eGFP, interactome. Interestingly, members of the CCT have been implicated in multiplication of different viruses including rabies virus [76, 77] , HCV [78] and FLUAV [79] . However, the role of these CCT proteins in virus multiplication remains unknown and may involve functions other than acting as molecular chaperones.
Previous studies documented the presence of several components of the of eIF4F, including 4A, within viral replication-transcription complexes (RTC) detected in cells infected with LCMV [80] and TCRV [81] . These findings, together with the detection of a number of ribosomal proteins in the NP interactome, suggest that translation of viral mRNAs may take place within RTC. However, rocaglamide interference with the activity of eIF4A within the viral RTC might contribute to its anti-LCMV activity.
In this work, we documented the generation of rLCMV/Strep-NP and its use to define the NP-interactome in infected cells. We presented evidence that ATP1A1 and PHB contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses using genetics and pharmacological inhibition of the genes. Consistent with our findings, bioinformatic analysis revealed that the protein network associated with ATP1A1 and PHB involves host cell proteins with functions in biological processes that have been implicated in virus multiplication (S5 Fig). The overall experimental approach described here can facilitate the identification of biologically relevant NP-interacting host-cell proteins. Future studies elucidating the roles of pro-and antiviral host-cell factors identified in this study in mammarenavirus multiplication will advance our understanding of the multiple functions of NP and uncover novel cellular targets for the development of antimammarenaviral drugs. In addition, by identifying proviral host-cell factors, drugs that are already approved can be repurposing as therapeutics to combat human pathogenic mammarenavirus infections.
Baby hamster kidney BHK-21 (American Type Culture Collection, ATCC, CCL-10), house mouse L929 (ATCC CCL-1), grivet Vero E6 (ATCC CRL-1586), human A549 (ATCC CCL-185), and human HEK 293T (ATCC CRL-3216) cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) containing 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, 2 mM of L-glutamine, 100 mg/ml of streptomycin, and 100 U/ml of penicillin at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 .
WT recombinant LCMVs, Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and clone-13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains, were generated as described [30, 82, 83] . Generation of rLCMV/NP(D382A) and SeV, strain Cantell, was described [30, 82, 83 ]. An rLCMV lacking GPC and expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) was generated by reverse genetics using procedures previously described [84] . rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep were generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate WT rLCMV and tri-segmented LCMV (r3LCMV) expressing eGFP [30] . For the generation of these novel rLCMVs, we created pol1S Cl-13 plasmids that directed Pol1-mediated intracellular synthesis of recombinant LCMV S genome RNA species coding for Strep-tagged NP or eGFP, respectively (Fig 1A and 1B) . The rLCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMV/eGFP) was generated as described [85] , and the rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (rLCMV/ZsG) instead of eGFP was generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMV/eGFP. Generation of rLASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP) will be described elsewhere. A tri-segmented recombinant live-attenuated Candid #1 strain of JUNV expressing eGFP (r3JUNV/eGFP) was generated as described [86] . For the generation of a novel single cycle rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP), a pol1S plasmid was created by omitting GPC open reading frame (ORF) from pol1S plasmid used for the generation of rLCMV/ZsG. scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP was rescued by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP [84] .
LCMV titers were determined by immunofocus forming assay (IFFA) as described [87] . Briefly, 10-fold serial virus dilutions were used to infect Vero E6 cell monolayers in a 96-well plate, and at 20 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). After cell permeabilization by treatment with dilution buffer (DB) (0.3% Triton X-100 in PBS-containing 3% bovine serum albumin [BSA]), cells were stained with a rat mAb to NP (VL-4, Bio X Cell, West Lebanon, NH) conjugated with Alexa Fluor 488 (VL-4-AF488, Protein Labeling Kit, Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA). VSV titers were determined by a plaque assay.
Total cell lysates were prepared in PD lysis buffer (+) (250 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% TritonX-100, 10% glycerol, 1 mM of MgCl 2 , 1 μM of CaCl 2 , 1 μM of ZnCl 2 ) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Clarified lysates were mixed at a 1:1 ratio with loading buffer (100 mM of Tris [pH 6.8], 20% 2-mercaptoethanol, 4% SDS, 0.2% bromophenol blue, 20% glycerol) and boiled for 5 min. Proteins samples were fractionated by SDS-PAGE using 4-20% gradient polyacrylamide gels (Mini-PROTEAN TGX gels 4-20%, Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA), and proteins were transferred by electroblotting onto polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Immobilin Transfer Membranes, Millipore, Billerica, MA). To detect Strep-tagged proteins, membranes were reacted with mouse monoclonal antibodies to Strep (QIAGEN, Germantown, MD), eGFP (Takara Bio USA, Mountain View, CA), GP 2 (We33/ 36), ATP1A1 (TehrmoFisher Scientific, Rockford, IL), PHB (Abcam, Cambridge, MA) or rabbit polyclonal antibodies to α-tubulin (Cell Signaling Technologies, Danvers, MA) or glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH, Millipore), respectively, followed by incubation with appropriate horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse or anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, West Grove, PA). SuperSignal West Pico or Femto chemiluminescent substrate (Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used to elicit chemiluminescent signals that were visualized using ImageQuant LAS 4000 Imager (GE Healthcare Bio-Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA).
Pull down of strep-tagged proteins from infected cell lysate. A549 cells prepared in six 15-cm dishes (approximately 1.0 x 10 8 cells in total) were infected with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP at an MOI of 0.1. At 48 h pi, cells were washed three times with ice-cold PBS, scraped into fresh ice-cold PBS, and centrifuged at 400 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Supernatant was removed, and cells were lysed with 12 ml of PD lysis buffer (+) supplemented with halt protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktail (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and 5 μg/ml of deoxyribonuclease I (Worthington Biochemical Corporation, Lakewood, NJ). Lysate was clarified by centrifugation at 3,900 x g at 4˚C for 30 min to remove cell debris. Clarified cell lysate was then incubated with strep-tactin sepharose resin (QIAGEN) at 4˚C. After 2 h of incubation, the resin was washed three times with PD lysis buffer (+) and once with PD lysis buffer without TritonX-100 (PD lysis buffer [-] ). After the centrifugation at 1,600 x g and 4˚C for 5 min, the last wash buffer was removed, and protein complexes associated with the resin were eluted into 2 ml of PD lysis buffer (-) containing 2.5 mM of desthiobiotin. The eluate was then subjected to TCA precipitation followed by trypsin digestion.
Multidimensional protein identification technology microcolumn. A MudPIT microcolumn was prepared by first creating a Kasil frit at one end of an un-deactivated 250-μm outside diameter (OD) capillary tube (interior diameter of 360 μm)(Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA). The Kasil frit was prepared by briefly dipping a 20-30-cm capillary tube in 300 μl of Kasil 1624 potassium silicate well-mixed solution (PQ Corporation, Malvern, PA) and 100 μl of formamide, curing at 100˚C for 4 h, and cutting the frit to a length of %2 mm. Strong cation exchange particles (SCX Luna, 5-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) were packed in-house from particle slurries in methanol to 2.5 cm. Reversed phase particles (2 cm, C18 Aqua, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were then successively packed onto the capillary tube using the same method as SCX loading.
MudPIT analysis. An analytical reversed-phase liquid chromatography column was generated by pulling a 100-μm (interior diameter (ID) of 360 μm) OD capillary tube (Polymicro Technologies, Phoenix, AZ) to 5-μm ID tip. Reversed-phase particles (Luna C18, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were packed directly into the pulled column at 5.5 mPa until 15 cm long. The column was further packed, washed, and equilibrated at 10 mPa with buffer B (80% acetonitrile, 0.1% formic acid) followed by buffer A (5% acetonitrile and 0.1% formic acid). MudPIT and analytical columns were assembled using a zero-dead volume union (Upchurch Scientific, Oak Harbor, WA). LC-MS/MS analysis was performed with an Agilent high-pressure LC pump (Agilent) and linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap Orbitrap Velos (Thermo) using an in-house built electrospray stage. Electrospray was performed directly from the analytical column by applying the electrospray ionization (ESI) voltage at a tee (150 μm ID, Upchurch Scientific) directly downstream of a 1:1,000 split flow to reduce the flow rate to 300 nl/min through the columns. MudPIT experiments (10-step) were performed in which each step corresponds to 0, 10, 20, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 , and 100% buffer C (500 mM of ammonium acetate, 0.1% formic acid, and 5% acetonitrile) and was run for 3 min at the beginning of a 110-min gradient.
Data analysis. Protein and peptide identification were performed with Integrated Proteomics Pipeline-IP2 (Integrated Proteomics Applications, San Diego, CA. http://www. integratedproteomics.com/) using ProLuCID and DTASelect2 algorithms. DTASelect parameters were-p 2 -y 1-trypstat-pfp .01 -extra-pI-DB-dm-in. Spectrum raw files were extracted into ms2 files from raw files using open source RawExtract 1.9.9 (Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA; http://fields.scripps.edu/downloads.php), and the tandem mass spectra were searched against a human protein database (UniprotKB). To accurately estimate peptide probabilities and false discovery rates, we used a decoy database containing the reversed sequences of all the proteins appended to the target database. Tandem mass spectra were matched to sequences using the ProLuCID algorithm with a 600-ppm peptide mass tolerance. ProLuCID searches were done on an Intel Xeon cluster processor running under the Linux operating system. The search space included half and fully tryptic peptide candidates that fell within the mass tolerance window with no miscleavage constraint. Carbamidomethylation (+57.02146 Da) of cysteine was considered as a static modification. siRNA screening A549 cells (1,000 cells/well) in a 384-well plate were reverse transfected with 0.5 pmol of siRNA pool (S2 Table) targeting each gene using 0.1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (Thermo Fisher Scientific) (final siRNA concentration was 10 nM), followed by incubation at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 . At 72 h post-transfection, cells were infected (MOI = 0.05) with rLCMV/ZsG. siRNA target host-cell proteins were selected based on availability of validated siRNA sequences. The siRNAs we used to examine the effects on LCMV multiplication of knockdown expression of NP-interacting host cell protein candidate hits corresponded to the Genome-wide ON TAR-GET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene; Dharmacon, Lafayette, CO).
A549 cells (3.0 x 10 4 cells/well) were reverse transfected in a 24-well plate with 6 pmol of siRNA pools targeting each gene using 1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (final siRNA concentration is 10 nM). At 72 h post-transfection, total cell lysate was prepared in modified lysis A buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl [pH = 8.0], 50 mM NaCl, 1%Triton X-100, 1.25% sodium deoxycholate) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. The total protein concentration of clarified cell lysate was measured by Pierce BCA Protein Assay Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The same amount of protein from each sample was subjected to SDS-PAGE, and the protein expression of siRNA-targeted genes was analyzed by western blots.
Cells infected with eGFP-or ZsGreen-expressing rLCMV were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. After cell permeabilization by treatment with DB, cells were stained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). Green fluorescence (eGFP or ZsGreen) and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, Bio-Tek, Winooski, VT).
Mock-and virus-infected cells were fixed with 4% PFA. After cell permeabilization and blocking by treatment with DB containing 1% normal goat serum, cells were incubated with primary mouse anti ATP1A1 or PHB antibody followed by secondary anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluore 568 (anti-mouse IgG-AF568). Subsequently, cells were stained with VL-4-AF488. In some samples, primary antibody against ATP1A1 or PHB was omitted to determine background fluorescence. To visualize nuclei, DAPI Fluoromount-G (SouthernBiotech, Birmingham, AL) was used to mount coverslips on a slide glass. Stained cells were observed under a confocal microscope (LSM 710, Zeiss) and data analyzed by ZEN software (Zeiss). Co-localization analysis was performed on a pixel by pixel basis using Zen software (Zeiss). Eight green (NP-positive) cells were marked and every pixel in the marked area was plotted in the scatter diagram based on its intensity level from each channel. Thresholds for green and red channels were determined using mock-infected cells stained with VL-4-AF488 (anti-NP) and anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluor 568, without using anti-ATP1A1 or -PHB antibodies. Each pixel was assigned a value of 1. Co-localization coefficients (CC) (or non-weighted CC) were determined by dividing the sum of both green-and red-positive pixels by the sum of green positive pixels. This calculation was repeated for eight individual cells. To assess the specificity of co-localization, we determined weighted CC by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal. Comparison of non-weighted and weighted CC allowed us to determine whether brighter pixels were present in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions. p values were determined by a two-tailed paired t test using GraphPad Prism software.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 2 h, followed by infection with rLCMV/eGFP (MOI = 0.01). Compounds were present to study endpoint. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS, and eGFP expression was examined by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated and rLCMV/eGFP-infected cells were set to 100%. The IC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded in a 96-well plate (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions and cultured at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 48 h. Then, CellTiter 96 AQ ueous one solution reagent (Promega, Madison, WI) was added. Thereafter, the assay was performed according to the manufacturer's recommendations, and the absorbance (490 nm) was obtained using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) reader (SPECTRA max plus 384; Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated cells were set to 100%. The CC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A plasmid expressing C-terminus Strep-tagged Z protein (pC-LCMV-Z-Strep) was generated using similar procedure to generate a plasmid expressing C-terminus FLAG-tagged LASV Z protein (pC-LASV-Z-FLAG), and the budding assay was performed as previously described [88] . Cells (HEK 293T) in a 12-well plate were transfected with 0.5 μg of empty pCAGGS vector or pC-LCMV-Z-Strep or pC-LASV-Z-FLAG using Lipofectamine 2000. At 5 h post-transfection, media were replaced with fresh media and incubated at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 19 h. Then the cells were three times washed with fresh medium. After the removal of the last wash medium, cells were cultured in fresh medium containing ouabain (30 or 40 nM) or rocaglamide (50 or 100 nM) or equivalent concentration of DMSO, and 24 h later, virion-like particle (VLP)-containing TCS and cells were collected. Total cell lysate was prepared by lysing the cells with lysis buffer (1% NP-40, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 62.5 mM NaCl, 0.4% sodium deoxycholate). After clarification of TCS from cell debris by centrifugation at 400 x g and 4˚C for 10 min, VLPs were collected by ultracentrifugation at 100,000 x g and 4˚C for 30 min through a 20% sucrose cushion. VLPs were resuspended in PBS, and Z expression in total cell lysate and TCS (containing VLPs) were analyzed by western blots.
A549 cells infected with rLCMV/eGFP were harvested using Accutase cell detachment solution (Innovative Cell Technologies, San Diego, CA) and fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. eGFP expression was examined by flow cytometry using a BD LSR II (Becton Dickson), and data were analyzed with FlowJo (Tree Star, Inc., Ashland, OR).
293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected with scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were three times washed with fresh media to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of 40 nM of ouabain or vehicle control (DMSO). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayers of BHK-21 cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. Total cell lysate was prepared in cell lysis buffer (150 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% [NP-40], 1 mM of EDTA] and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. ZsGreen signal intensity in clarified cell lysate was measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek).
A549 cells seeded (2 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with combinations of different concentrations of ouabain and rocaglamide for 2 h and then infected (MOI = 0.01) with rLCMV/eGFP. Compounds were present in the culture medium throughout the experiment. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed, permeabilized by treatment with DB, and stained with DAPI. eGFP and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). eGFP readouts were normalized by DAPI readouts, and normalized data were used to analyze synergistic effect of the two compounds by the MacSynergy II program [89] .
Data were analyzed for p values by a two-tailed unpaired t test using GraphPad Prism software. | What drug is used to treat congestive heart failure? | 5,155 | ouabain | 14,232 |
1,687 | Interactome analysis of the lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus nucleoprotein in infected cells reveals ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit Alpha 1 and prohibitin as host-cell factors involved in the life cycle of mammarenaviruses
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834214/
SHA: efbd0dfc426da5dd25ce29411d6fa37571623773
Authors: Iwasaki, Masaharu; Minder, Petra; Caì, Yíngyún; Kuhn, Jens H.; Yates, John R.; Torbett, Bruce E.; de la Torre, Juan C.
Date: 2018-02-20
DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892
License: cc0
Abstract: Several mammalian arenaviruses (mammarenaviruses) cause hemorrhagic fevers in humans and pose serious public health concerns in their endemic regions. Additionally, mounting evidence indicates that the worldwide-distributed, prototypic mammarenavirus, lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance. Concerns about human-pathogenic mammarenaviruses are exacerbated by of the lack of licensed vaccines, and current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to off-label use of ribavirin that is only partially effective. Detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions may facilitate the development of novel anti-mammarenavirus strategies by targeting components of the host-cell machinery that are required for efficient virus multiplication. Here we document the generation of a recombinant LCMV encoding a nucleoprotein (NP) containing an affinity tag (rLCMV/Strep-NP) and its use to capture the NP-interactome in infected cells. Our proteomic approach combined with genetics and pharmacological validation assays identified ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit alpha 1 (ATP1A1) and prohibitin (PHB) as pro-viral factors. Cell-based assays revealed that ATP1A1 and PHB are involved in different steps of the virus life cycle. Accordingly, we observed a synergistic inhibitory effect on LCMV multiplication with a combination of ATP1A1 and PHB inhibitors. We show that ATP1A1 inhibitors suppress multiplication of Lassa virus and Candid#1, a live-attenuated vaccine strain of Junín virus, suggesting that the requirement of ATP1A1 in virus multiplication is conserved among genetically distantly related mammarenaviruses. Our findings suggest that clinically approved inhibitors of ATP1A1, like digoxin, could be repurposed to treat infections by mammarenaviruses pathogenic for humans.
Text: Introduction Mammarenaviruses (Arenaviridae: Mammarenavirus) cause chronic infections of rodents worldwide [1] . Invasion of human dwellings by infected rodents can result in human infections through mucosal exposure to aerosols or by direct contact of abraded skin with infectious material. Several mammarenaviruses cause viral hemorrhagic fevers (VHFs) in humans and pose important public health problems in their endemic areas [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] . Mammarenaviruses are classified into two main groups, Old World (OW) and New World (NW) [1] . The OW Lassa virus (LASV), causative agent of Lassa fever (LF), is the most significant OW mammarenaviral pathogen. LASV is estimated to infect several hundred thousand individuals annually in Western Africa, resulting in a high number of LF cases associated with high morbidity and lethality. Moreover, LASV endemic regions are expanding [7] , and the association of the recently identified mammarenavirus Lujo virus with a VHF outbreak in Southern Africa [8, 9] has raised concerns about the emergence of novel VHF-causing mammarenaviruses. The most significant NW mammarenavirus is Junín virus (JUNV), which causes Argentinian hemorrhagic fever [10] . The worldwide-distributed OW mammarenavirus lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance especially in congenital infections [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] . Moreover, LCMV poses a particular threat to immunocompromised individuals, as has been illustrated by fatal cases of LCMV infection associated with organ transplants [16, 17] . However, LCMV research can be safely performed at BSL-2 containment, rather than the BSL-4 containment necessary for live LASV or JUNV research [18] .
No US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-licensed vaccines are available for the treatment of arenavirus infections, although a live attenuated vaccine strain of JUNV, Candid#1, is licensed in Argentina. Likewise, current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to an offlabel use of the nucleoside analogue ribavirin that is only partially effective and can cause significant side effects [19] [20] [21] . Development of effective anti-mammarenavirus drugs has been hampered by the lack of detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions required for mammarenavirus multiplication that could represent amenable targets for antiviral therapy. the potential problem that overexpression of a single viral gene product may potentiate PPI interactions that are not relevant during the course of a natural virus infection. To overcome this issue, we designed a recombinant LCMV (rLCMV) encoding a tandem [WSHPQFEK (GGGS) 3 WSHPQFEK] Strep-tag fused to the amino-terminus of NP (rLCMV/Strep-NP) (Fig 1A and 1B) . To facilitate the identification of specific PPI between NP and host cell proteins, we used our mammarenavirus tri-segmented (r3) platform [30] to design an r3LCMV expressing a C-terminus Strep-tag version of enhanced green fluorescent protein (r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep) that we used as a negative control (Fig 1A and 1B) . We rescued rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep and confirmed the expression of strep-tagged NP and eGFP in rLCMV/ Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, respectively (Fig 1C) . Next, we examined the growth properties of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep in three different cells lines from hamsters, humans, and nonhuman primates (BHK-21, A549, and Vero E6 cells, respectively) (Fig 1D) . The fitness of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep was modestly decreased compared to that observed with wild-type (WT) Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and Clone 13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains of LCMV. However, both rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep had WT-like growth kinetics and reached high titers. As with WT LCMV, infection with rLCMV/Strep-NP prevented production of bioactive IFN-I by cells in response to Sendai virus (SeV) infection as determined using an IFN bioassay based on protection against the cytopathic effect (CPE) induced by infection with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) (Fig 1E) . Vero cells treated for 16 h with tissue cultured supernatants (TCS) from A549 cells infected first with WT LCMV or rLCMV/Strep, followed by 24 h infection with SeV, remained fully susceptible to VSV-induced CPE. In contrast, Vero cells treated with TCS from A549 cells infected with rLCMV/NP(D382A), a mutant unable to prevent induction of IFN-I [30] , and subsequently with SeV, were protected against VSV induced CPE.
We selected the human A549 cell line because lung epithelial cells are one of the initial cell targets of humans following inhalation of mammarenavirions. We infected A549 cells (multiplicity of infection [MOI] = 0.1) with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep (Fig 2A) . At 48 h post-inoculation (pi), we prepared total cell lysates for pull-down (PD) assays using a sepharose resin coated with strep-tactin. Aliquots of the protein complexes present in the PD samples were fractionated by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) (Fig 2B) followed by SYPRO Ruby protein gel staining. We compared the pattern of stained protein bands detected between rLCMV/Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strepinfected samples and confirmed the presence of Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep in pertinent samples (Fig 2B) . Protein complexes in the rest of eluates from the PD samples were concentrated by trichloroacetic acid (TCA) precipitation and subjected to trypsin digestion (Fig 2A) . Digested peptides were subjected to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) analysis using a hybrid mass spectrometer consisting of linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap (LTQ) Velos and an Orbitrap analyser.
We classified host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS analysis from two independent biological replicates into two groups: 1) proteins found only in Strep-NP PD samples with at least five spectral counts ( Table 1) , and 2) proteins found in both Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep PD samples with five or higher spectral counts in Strep-NP samples and at least 2-fold higher spectral counts in Strep-NP PD compared to eGFP PD samples ( Table 2) . Filtering the data using these criteria resulted in identification of 139 candidate host-cell proteins as NP-interacting partners. Among 53 proteins found present in both NP-and eGFP-PD samples, 36 had spectral counts in the NP-PD sample that were less than two-fold higher than their corresponding spectral counts in the eGFP-PD sample (Fig 2C and S1 Table) . Based on the criteria we described above, we considered these proteins to be highly unlikely specific NPinteractors with an involvement in the LCMV life cycle, and therefore we did not consider these hits for further analysis. However, we acknowledge that we cannot formally rule out that some of these hits could still play a role on the life cycle of LCMV.
The protein annotation through evolutionary relationship (PANTHER) protein family classification (Biological Process) of the NP-interacting protein candidates revealed that a large number of proteins were involved in metabolic and cellular processes (Fig 2D) . We also analyzed the molecular functions of the NP-interacting protein candidates according to the PAN-THER protein profile classification (Fig 2E) , which revealed diversified biochemical functions enriched for nucleic acid-binding proteins and chaperones.
To initially assess pro-or anti-viral roles of NP-interacting host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS, we examined the effect of small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated knockdown (kd) of each of the corresponding genes on multiplication of rLCMV expressing reporter gene ZsGreen (ZsG) in A549 cells (Fig 3A) . The siRNAs we used were from the genome-wide ON TARGET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene). OTPs are latest generation of siRNAs and offer significant advantages over previous generations. Off-target effects are primarily driven by antisense strand microRNA (miR)-like seed activity. In OTPs, the sense strand is modified to favor antisense strand uptake whereas the antisense strand seed region is modified to drastically reduce seed-related off-targeting [33] . In addition, OTPs are designed on the foundation of the SMARTselection algorithm (Dharmacon), widely considered to be the best algorithm for rational siRNA design strategy. Numerous host-cell factors showed an anti-LCMV effect (increased ZsG expression by kd of the genes), including microtubule-associated protein 1B (MAP1B) [ [38] , dengue virus 2 (DENV-2) [39] , and chikungunya virus (CHIKV) [40] .
To begin assessing the potential biological implications of the identified NP-host cell protein interactions, we selected ATP1A1 and PHB given the availability of reagents, existing knowledge about their roles in cell physiology, and evidence of participation in multiplication of other viruses. We confirmed that cells transfected with siRNA specific to ATP1A1 and PHB exhibited the predicted reduced levels in ATP1A1 and PHB protein expression (Fig 3B) . Likewise, we examined whether siRNA-mediated reduced expression levels of ZsGreen correlated with reduced LCMV progeny titers. For this, we transfected A549 cells with siRNA targeting Expression of Strep-tagged proteins. A549 cells seeded (5.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 6-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMVs. At 48 h pi, total cell lysates were prepared, and protein expression was analyzed by western blotting. (D) Growth properties of rLCMV expressing Strep-tagged proteins. BHK-21 (1.75 x 10 5 cells/well), A549 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well), or Vero E6 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well) cells seeded in 24-well plates and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.01) with the indicated rLCMVs. At the indicated times pi, TCSs were collected and virus titers determined by IFFA. Results represent means ± SD of the results of three independent experiments. (E) Lack of induction of IFN-I in cells infected with rLCMV/Strep-NP. A549 cells were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMV or mock-infected, and 36 h later infected with SeV (MOI = 1). At 24 h pi with SeV, TCS were collected and used, following virus inactivation by U.V., to treat Vero E6 cells for 16 h, followed by infection with rVSV (MOI = 0.1) [rVSV(+)] or mockinfection [rVSV (-) ]. At 24 h pi with rVSV, cells were fixed with 4% PFA and stained with crystal violet to assess rVSV-induced cytopathic effect. We used as control rLCMV/NP(D382A) that contains mutation D382A within NP, which has been shown to abrogate the NP's ability to counteract the induction of IFN-I production.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892.g001 ATP1A1 or with NC siRNA 72 h prior to infection with rLCMV/ZsG. We found that siRNAmediated kd of ATP1A1 dramatically inhibited ZsGreen expression (Fig 3Ci) , which was associated with a significant reduction of infectious LCMV progeny (Fig 3Cii) . Our attempts to see interaction between NP and ATP1A1 or NP and PHB by co-immunoprecipitation were unsuccessful. Several possibilities could account for this, including interactions of low affinity or high on/off rate or both. Another consideration is that only a minor fraction of NP might be engaged in the interaction with a given host cell protein, and therefore, detection of these interactions would require highly sensitive methods such as LC-MS/MS. To overcome this problem we used confocal microscopy to examine the co-localization of NP with ATP1A1 and PHB in LCMV-infected cells. Weighted co-localization coefficients (CC), determined by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal, were significantly higher than non-weighted CC, indicating the presence of brighter pixels in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions (Fig 4) .
The cardiac glycoside ouabain is an inhibitor of ATP1A1 that has been used to treat congestive heart failure in European countries [41] . The PHB inhibitor rocaglamide is a flavagline from an Aglaia tree used in traditional Chinese medicine [42] that has potent anticancer activity [43] . To examine whether pharmacological inhibition of ATP1A1 or PHB inhibited LCMV multiplication, we pretreated human (A549 and HEK 293T), nonhuman primate (Vero E6), and rodent (murine L929 and hamster BHK-21) cells with ouabain or rocaglamide and infected them with rLCMV/eGFP (S1 Fig). Ouabain treatment resulted in a strong dosedependent inhibition of eGFP expression in infected human-and nonhuman primate cells, but did not affect eGFP expression intensity in infected rodent cells (S1A Fig) . This finding is consistent with rodents expressing an ATP1A1 allele that is resistant to ouabain inhibition [44] .
Likewise, we observed a dose-dependent rocaglamide inhibition of eGFP expression in all cell lines infected with rLCMV/eGFP (S1B Fig) . Consistent with these findings, production of infectious LCMV progeny was reduced by treatment with either ouabain or rocaglamide ( Fig 5A) within a concentration range that had minimal impact on cell viability (Fig 5B) . To examine the correlation between efficacy and cytotoxicity of these compounds, we determined their therapeutic index (TI = CC 50 /IC 50 (Fig 5Bi) ; whereas rocaglamide had TIs of >105 (CC 50 > 1000 nM, IC 50 = 9.51 nM) and 10.3 (CC 50 = 100 nM, IC 50 = 9.75 nM) in A549 and Vero E6 cells, respectively (Fig 5Bii) . Moreover, the ATP1A1 antagonist inhibitor, bufalin, also exhibited robust anti-LCMV activity with TIs of 8.92 (CC 50 Heat shock protein HSP 90-alpha HSP90AA1 P07900 8 10 9
Endoplasmin HSP90B1 P14625 9 9 9
Large neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1 SLC7A5 Q01650 6 12 9
Keratin, type II cuticular Hb1 KRT81 Q14533 10 8 9
Putative helicase MOV-10 MOV10 Q9HCE1 8 10 9
Microtubule-associated protein 1B MAP1B P46821 6 11 8.5
Spectrin beta chain, rocaglamide (100 nM) (Fig 5C) , further supporting a specific anti-LCMV activity of ouabain and rocaglamide that was not due to reduced cell viability.
To gain insights about the mechanisms by which ouabain and rocaglamide exert their anti-LCMV activity, we examined effects of these compounds on distinct steps of the LCMV life cycle. First, we asked whether ouabain and rocaglamide affected cell entry of LCMV. We conducted time-of-addition experiments in which we treated cells with ouabain or rocaglamide prior to virus inoculation (-1.5 h), at the time of inoculation (0 h), or 1.5 h pi (+1.5 h) (Fig 6A) .
In some samples, we used ammonium chloride starting at 4 h pi to block multiple rounds of virus infection. The timing of compound addition did not significantly change the number of eGFP-positive cells, indicating that neither ouabain nor rocaglamide inhibited cell entry of LCMV. The number of eGFP + cells in ouabain-treated cells was reduced at all time-of-addition points compared to vehicle dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-treated cells, but was similar to that observed in ammonium chloride-treated cells. Thus, ouabain did not inhibit LCMV RNA replication and gene expression, but rather a late step of the LCMV life cycle. In contrast, rocaglamide treatment resulted in a negligible number of eGFP + cells, indicating that rocaglamide inhibited virus RNA replication and gene transcription.
To further investigate the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis, we infected A549 cells with a recombinant single-cycle infectious LCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) and treated cells with either ouabain or rocaglamide. Seventy-two hours later, we determined percent normalized eGFP expression in infected cells (Fig 6B) . Consistent with our results from the time-of-addition experiment, ouabain did not affect reporter eGFP expression. However, rocaglamide reduced eGFP expression, confirming inhibitory effect of rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis.
We also examined the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on the late step of the arenavirus life cycle, Z-mediated budding. For this experiment, we transfected cells with Z-Strep-and Z-FLAG (DYKDDDDK epitope)-expressing plasmids from LCMV and LASV, respectively. At 24 h post-transfection, we removed the tissue culture supernatant (TCS) and washed extensively transfected cells to eliminate already budded Z. We cultured the transfected cells in the presence or absence of ouabain or rocaglamide. At 24 h, we determined by WB levels of Z protein in both whole cell lysates and associated with virus-like particles (VLPs) collected from TCS. Treatment with rocaglamide, but not with ouabain, caused a reduction in both LCMV and LASV Z budding efficiency (Fig 6C and 6D) . The reproducibility of these findings was confirmed based on results from four independent experiments (Fig 6E) . We also examined whether ouabain could interfere with a step of assembly of infectious progeny that was not captured by the Z budding assay through two additional experiments. The first experiment involved the use of a newly generated single-cycle infectious recombinant LCMV expressing the reporter gene ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP) to infect (MOI = 0.1) A549 cells (1 st infection). These cells were subsequently transfected with a plasmid expressing LCMV GPC. After 24 h, we used TCS to infect a fresh cell monolayer (2 nd infection) and identified infected cells based on ZsGreen expression. To assess the effect of ouabain on de novo assembly of infectious progeny we determined normalized ratios (2 nd /1 st infection) of ZsGreen + cells (Fig 6F) . The second experiment involved infection (MOI = 0.1) of cells with WT LCMV, and 48 h later we washed infected cells three times to remove the extracellular infectious progeny produced during the first 48 h of infection. Then, fresh media containing ouabain or DMSO vehicle control were added, and 24 h later we determined virus titers in TCS (Fig 6G) . Results from both experiments consistently showed that ouabain did not inhibit assembly de novo of extracellular infectious virus.
Combination therapy can significantly alleviate the problem posed by the rapid emergence of drug-resistant variants commonly observed during monotherapy strategies to control RNA virus infections. Since ouabain and rocaglamide inhibited different steps of the LCMV life cycle, we examined whether their use in combination results in a synergistic anti-LCMV effect. For this experiment, we infected A549 cells with rLCMV/eGFP and treated them with ouabain and rocaglamide using different concentrations and combinations. At 48 h pi, we determined percent eGFP expression (Fig 7) . Combination treatment with ouabain and rocaglamide resulted in synergistic anti-LCMV activity that was enhanced under conditions using higher concentrations of ouabain and lower concentrations of rocaglamide.
We next asked whether the ATP1A1 and PHB host-cell factors contributed also to multiplication of viral hemorrhagic fever-causing LASV. We treated A549 cells with ouabain, bufalin, or rocaglamide and inoculated the treated cells with recombinant LASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP). eGFP expression was examined 48 h later. Similar to rLCMV infection, LASV multiplication was restricted in ouabain-, bufalin-, or rocaglamide-treated cells at concentrations minimally impacting cell viability, although their IC 50 values were slightly higher than those found with the LCMV infection system (Fig 5B and S2 Fig) as ouabain had IC 50 of 9.34 nM, bufalin had IC 50 of 1.66 nM and rocaglamide had IC 50 of 37.0 nM (Fig 8) . We also tested the effect of compounds targeting ATP1A1 and PHB on multiplication of JUNV. Consistent with our results obtained with LCMV and LASV, ouabain, bufalin, and rocaglamide strongly suppressed JUNV multiplication (S3 Fig). These findings indicate that ATP1A1 and PHB function as pro-viral factors of a range of mammarenaviruses.
We identified ATP1A1 and PHB as novel host-cell proteins that contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses. Our approach using a recombinant LCMV expressing NP with an affinity tag facilitated defining the NP interactome in the context of LCMV infection. Recently, using an NP-specific monoclonal antibody (mAb) to precipitate NP and associated cellular protein partners in a mammarenavirus NP interactome, King et al. identified 348 host proteins that associated with LCMV NP [45] . We found 99 common proteins between our filtered LCMV NP interactome of 171 proteins and the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. Differences in both experimental conditions and analysis methodologies used to generate the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. and ours likely h post-transfection, cells were washed with fresh media to eliminate Z-mediated production of VLPs in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain or Roc-A at the indicated concentrations. VLPs present in TCS were collected by ultracentrifugation, and cell lysates were prepared. Z protein expression in VLPs and cell lysates were determined by western blots using antibodies to Strep-tag (C) and FLAG-tag (D). Budding efficiency for each sample was estimated by dividing the signal intensity of the Z protein associated with VLPs by that of Z detected in the cell lysate. Numbers on the bottom of panel C correspond to LCMV Z budding efficiencies determined in a representative experiment. Results shown in panel E correspond to the average and SD from four independent experiments including the one shown in panel D. The mean budding efficiency of DMSO treatedsamples was set to 100%. Data represent mean ± SD of four independent experiments. (F) Effect of ouabain on incorporation of viral glycoprotein into virions. 293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with scrLCMV/ZsG (1 st infection) for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were washed with fresh medium to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain at 40 nM (OUA). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayer of BHK-21 cells (2 nd infection) seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. ZsGreen signal intensity was measured by a fluorescent plate reader. GP-incorporation efficiency was estimated by dividing ZsGreen signal intensity in BHK-21 cell lysate (2 nd ) by that in 293T cell lysate (1 st ). The mean GP-incorporation efficiency of DMSO treated samples was set to 100%. Data represent means ± SD from three independent experiments. contributed to the observed differences between data sets. Despite progress in the implementation of global proteomics-based screens to identify virus-host protein-protein interactions, overlap between datasets for the same viral system is usually limited. However, the substantial overlap of 99 of the 171 NP-interacting proteins from both studies supports the overall reliability of both systems. We used results of the eGFP-Strep interactome, determined in r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, as a control to filter out non-specific NP interactions, which may have resulted in a higher degree of stringency than in the study by King et al for selection of NP-interacting candidates. The combined information provided by the NP interactome reported by King et al. and the one we present in this work, will facilitate future studies to further characterize the functional and biological implications of NP-host cell interacting proteins.
All tested mammarenavirus NPs, with exception of the NP from TCRV, blocked IRF-3-dependent IFN-I induction [25, 46] . The anti-IFN activity of NP was mapped to its C-terminal part and linked to the 3'-5' exonuclease domain present with the NP C-terminal part [30] . Inhibitor-B kinase ε (IKKε) was identified as an NP-binding protein using plasmid-mediated overexpression in transfected cells [47] , and the NP-IKKε binding affinity correlated with NP's ability to inhibit IFN-I induction [47] . We, as well as the work by King et al. [45] , did not detect this NP-IKKε interaction. This discrepancy may have been caused by very low expression of IKKε in LCMV-infected cells, which prevented detection of IKKε by LC-MS/MS. Alternatively, NP-IKKε interaction could possibility be temporarily regulated and take place at early times pi, but could be mostly absent at 48 h pi, the time at which we prepared the cell lysates for our proteomics studies. Future studies comparing the NP interactome at different times during infection will contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics of NP/hostcell protein interactions.
Na + /K + -ATPase is a well-characterized membrane ion transporter and is composed of two functional subunits (α and β) and one regulatory γ subunit [48] . ATP1A1 represents one of four α subunits [49, 50] . Recent evidence has suggested that the Na + /K + -ATPase is involved in multiple cell signaling pathways that are independent of its ion-pumping function [51] . Cardiac glycoside inhibitors of the Na + /K + -ATPase (NKA), so-called cardiotonic steroids (CST; e.g., ouabain, bufalin), have been shown to inhibit multiplication of different viruses including Ebola virus [35], coronaviruses [36], herpes simplex virus 1 [52, 53] , CHIKV [54] , human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) [55] , adenovirus [56] and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 1 [57] .
Different mechanisms are likely to contribute to the antiviral activity of CSTs, including altered cell functions modulated by the signaling activity of Na + /K + -ATPase [58] . Thus, a low concentration of ouabain induces a conformational change in ATP1A1 that results in activation and release of proto-oncogene tyrosine protein kinase, Src, from ATP1A1, followed by activation of as yet unknown downstream signaling that inhibits, for instance, cell entry of murine hepatitis virus (MHV) [59] . However, our results indicated that ouabain did not interfere with LCMV cell entry. In addition, treatment with the Src inhibitor 4-amino-5-(4-methylphenyl)-7-(t-butyl)pyrazolo [3,4-d] pyrimidine (PP1) did not counteract the anti-LCMV activity of ouabain (S4 Fig). Nevertheless, ATP1A1-mediated Src signaling could plausibly contribute to the inhibitory effect of ouabain on JUNV multiplication as similarly to that observed with MHV. Moreover, cell entry of JUNV occurs also by clathrin-mediated endocytosis [60] , a process affected by Src signaling. Ouabain has been clinically used in several European countries for the management of congestive heart failure, whereas bufalin has been tested in clinical trials for cancer treatments [61] , and the CST digoxin has been FDA-approved since 1997 to treat heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Hence, opportunities for the repurposing CSTs have potential as therapeutics to treat infections caused by viral hemorrhagic fever-causing arenaviruses.
The PHB inhibitor, rocaglamide, appeared to interfere with LCMV RNA synthesis and budding, but did not affect LCMV cell entry. In contrast, PHB was reported to be a cell entry receptor for DENV-2 [39] and CHIKV [40] . On the other hand, PHB did not act as a virus cell entry receptor for HCV. Rather, PHB contributed to HCV cell entry through binding to cellular RAF (c-Raf; proto-oncogene serine/threonine-protein kinase) and subsequent Harvey rat sarcoma proto-oncogene (HRas) activation that induces a signal transduction pathway required for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mediated HCV cell entry [37] . In addition, siRNA-mediated kd of PHB decreased production of H5N1 FLUAV [38] . These findings indicate that PHB is involved in different steps of the life cycle of a variety of viruses, and thereby an attractive target for the development of broad-spectrum antiviral drugs.
Rocaglate is a group of natural compounds, which includes rocaglamide, that inhibits protein synthesis by targeting the ATP-dependent DEAD-box RNA helicase eukaryotic initiation factor 4A (eIF4A) and exerts anti-tumor activity [62, 63] . The rocaglate compound, silvestrol, inhibits Ebola virus multiplication likely by interfering with the role of eIF4A in viral protein translation [64] .
While we focused on two host proteins, ATP1A1 and PHB, in this study, our proteomics approach also identified several NP-interacting host-cell proteins whose kd expression via siRNA resulted in increased LCMV multiplication. These proteins, which included MAP1B, might have anti-LCMV activity. MAP1B has been shown to bind to nonstructural proteins 1 (NS1) and 2 (NS2) of human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) [34] . NS1 and NS2 of HRSV antagonizes host IFN-I response by reducing the levels of TNF receptor associated factor (TRAF3), IKKε (NS1), and STAT2 (NS2) [65] . NS2-MAP1B interaction interfered with HRSV NS2's ability to reduce levels of STAT2, whereas the role of NS1-MAP1B interaction remains to be determined [34] . Examining the role of NP-MAP1B interaction in modulating NP's ability to inhibit induction of type I IFN is of interest.
We identified among the NP-interacting host cell proteins the RNA helicase Moloney leukemia virus 10 (MOV10), which has been reported to be an antiviral factor for FLUAV [66] , retroviruses [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] , and DENV-2 [72] . We did not observe increased LCMV multiplication in cells subjected to siRNA-mediated kd of MOV10, a finding that would question an anti-LCMV activity of MOV10. However, we consider that LCMV has already optimal multiplication in A549 cells and further increases may occur only under rather unique conditions. MOV10 was shown to enhance IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction following SeV infection through a tank binding kinase 1 (TBK1)-independent and IKKε-dependent manner. This finding was further supported by demonstrating MOV10-IKKε interaction by co-immunoprecipitation studies [73] . We documented that the anti-IFN activity of mammarenavirus NP correlated with its ability to interact with IKKε [47] . Whether NP-MOV10 interaction prevents MOV10 from enhancing IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction remains to be determined.
Several members of the mammalian chaperonin-containing T-complex (CCT) were identified as prominent hits in our NP interactome. The mammalian CCT is critical for folding of many proteins with important functions in diverse cellular processes [74] , and may protect complex protein topologies within its central cavity during biosynthesis and folding [75] . The contribution of CCT members to NP assembly into a nucleocapsid structure could account for their presence in the NP, but not eGFP, interactome. Interestingly, members of the CCT have been implicated in multiplication of different viruses including rabies virus [76, 77] , HCV [78] and FLUAV [79] . However, the role of these CCT proteins in virus multiplication remains unknown and may involve functions other than acting as molecular chaperones.
Previous studies documented the presence of several components of the of eIF4F, including 4A, within viral replication-transcription complexes (RTC) detected in cells infected with LCMV [80] and TCRV [81] . These findings, together with the detection of a number of ribosomal proteins in the NP interactome, suggest that translation of viral mRNAs may take place within RTC. However, rocaglamide interference with the activity of eIF4A within the viral RTC might contribute to its anti-LCMV activity.
In this work, we documented the generation of rLCMV/Strep-NP and its use to define the NP-interactome in infected cells. We presented evidence that ATP1A1 and PHB contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses using genetics and pharmacological inhibition of the genes. Consistent with our findings, bioinformatic analysis revealed that the protein network associated with ATP1A1 and PHB involves host cell proteins with functions in biological processes that have been implicated in virus multiplication (S5 Fig). The overall experimental approach described here can facilitate the identification of biologically relevant NP-interacting host-cell proteins. Future studies elucidating the roles of pro-and antiviral host-cell factors identified in this study in mammarenavirus multiplication will advance our understanding of the multiple functions of NP and uncover novel cellular targets for the development of antimammarenaviral drugs. In addition, by identifying proviral host-cell factors, drugs that are already approved can be repurposing as therapeutics to combat human pathogenic mammarenavirus infections.
Baby hamster kidney BHK-21 (American Type Culture Collection, ATCC, CCL-10), house mouse L929 (ATCC CCL-1), grivet Vero E6 (ATCC CRL-1586), human A549 (ATCC CCL-185), and human HEK 293T (ATCC CRL-3216) cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) containing 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, 2 mM of L-glutamine, 100 mg/ml of streptomycin, and 100 U/ml of penicillin at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 .
WT recombinant LCMVs, Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and clone-13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains, were generated as described [30, 82, 83] . Generation of rLCMV/NP(D382A) and SeV, strain Cantell, was described [30, 82, 83 ]. An rLCMV lacking GPC and expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) was generated by reverse genetics using procedures previously described [84] . rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep were generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate WT rLCMV and tri-segmented LCMV (r3LCMV) expressing eGFP [30] . For the generation of these novel rLCMVs, we created pol1S Cl-13 plasmids that directed Pol1-mediated intracellular synthesis of recombinant LCMV S genome RNA species coding for Strep-tagged NP or eGFP, respectively (Fig 1A and 1B) . The rLCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMV/eGFP) was generated as described [85] , and the rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (rLCMV/ZsG) instead of eGFP was generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMV/eGFP. Generation of rLASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP) will be described elsewhere. A tri-segmented recombinant live-attenuated Candid #1 strain of JUNV expressing eGFP (r3JUNV/eGFP) was generated as described [86] . For the generation of a novel single cycle rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP), a pol1S plasmid was created by omitting GPC open reading frame (ORF) from pol1S plasmid used for the generation of rLCMV/ZsG. scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP was rescued by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP [84] .
LCMV titers were determined by immunofocus forming assay (IFFA) as described [87] . Briefly, 10-fold serial virus dilutions were used to infect Vero E6 cell monolayers in a 96-well plate, and at 20 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). After cell permeabilization by treatment with dilution buffer (DB) (0.3% Triton X-100 in PBS-containing 3% bovine serum albumin [BSA]), cells were stained with a rat mAb to NP (VL-4, Bio X Cell, West Lebanon, NH) conjugated with Alexa Fluor 488 (VL-4-AF488, Protein Labeling Kit, Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA). VSV titers were determined by a plaque assay.
Total cell lysates were prepared in PD lysis buffer (+) (250 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% TritonX-100, 10% glycerol, 1 mM of MgCl 2 , 1 μM of CaCl 2 , 1 μM of ZnCl 2 ) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Clarified lysates were mixed at a 1:1 ratio with loading buffer (100 mM of Tris [pH 6.8], 20% 2-mercaptoethanol, 4% SDS, 0.2% bromophenol blue, 20% glycerol) and boiled for 5 min. Proteins samples were fractionated by SDS-PAGE using 4-20% gradient polyacrylamide gels (Mini-PROTEAN TGX gels 4-20%, Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA), and proteins were transferred by electroblotting onto polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Immobilin Transfer Membranes, Millipore, Billerica, MA). To detect Strep-tagged proteins, membranes were reacted with mouse monoclonal antibodies to Strep (QIAGEN, Germantown, MD), eGFP (Takara Bio USA, Mountain View, CA), GP 2 (We33/ 36), ATP1A1 (TehrmoFisher Scientific, Rockford, IL), PHB (Abcam, Cambridge, MA) or rabbit polyclonal antibodies to α-tubulin (Cell Signaling Technologies, Danvers, MA) or glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH, Millipore), respectively, followed by incubation with appropriate horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse or anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, West Grove, PA). SuperSignal West Pico or Femto chemiluminescent substrate (Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used to elicit chemiluminescent signals that were visualized using ImageQuant LAS 4000 Imager (GE Healthcare Bio-Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA).
Pull down of strep-tagged proteins from infected cell lysate. A549 cells prepared in six 15-cm dishes (approximately 1.0 x 10 8 cells in total) were infected with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP at an MOI of 0.1. At 48 h pi, cells were washed three times with ice-cold PBS, scraped into fresh ice-cold PBS, and centrifuged at 400 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Supernatant was removed, and cells were lysed with 12 ml of PD lysis buffer (+) supplemented with halt protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktail (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and 5 μg/ml of deoxyribonuclease I (Worthington Biochemical Corporation, Lakewood, NJ). Lysate was clarified by centrifugation at 3,900 x g at 4˚C for 30 min to remove cell debris. Clarified cell lysate was then incubated with strep-tactin sepharose resin (QIAGEN) at 4˚C. After 2 h of incubation, the resin was washed three times with PD lysis buffer (+) and once with PD lysis buffer without TritonX-100 (PD lysis buffer [-] ). After the centrifugation at 1,600 x g and 4˚C for 5 min, the last wash buffer was removed, and protein complexes associated with the resin were eluted into 2 ml of PD lysis buffer (-) containing 2.5 mM of desthiobiotin. The eluate was then subjected to TCA precipitation followed by trypsin digestion.
Multidimensional protein identification technology microcolumn. A MudPIT microcolumn was prepared by first creating a Kasil frit at one end of an un-deactivated 250-μm outside diameter (OD) capillary tube (interior diameter of 360 μm)(Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA). The Kasil frit was prepared by briefly dipping a 20-30-cm capillary tube in 300 μl of Kasil 1624 potassium silicate well-mixed solution (PQ Corporation, Malvern, PA) and 100 μl of formamide, curing at 100˚C for 4 h, and cutting the frit to a length of %2 mm. Strong cation exchange particles (SCX Luna, 5-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) were packed in-house from particle slurries in methanol to 2.5 cm. Reversed phase particles (2 cm, C18 Aqua, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were then successively packed onto the capillary tube using the same method as SCX loading.
MudPIT analysis. An analytical reversed-phase liquid chromatography column was generated by pulling a 100-μm (interior diameter (ID) of 360 μm) OD capillary tube (Polymicro Technologies, Phoenix, AZ) to 5-μm ID tip. Reversed-phase particles (Luna C18, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were packed directly into the pulled column at 5.5 mPa until 15 cm long. The column was further packed, washed, and equilibrated at 10 mPa with buffer B (80% acetonitrile, 0.1% formic acid) followed by buffer A (5% acetonitrile and 0.1% formic acid). MudPIT and analytical columns were assembled using a zero-dead volume union (Upchurch Scientific, Oak Harbor, WA). LC-MS/MS analysis was performed with an Agilent high-pressure LC pump (Agilent) and linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap Orbitrap Velos (Thermo) using an in-house built electrospray stage. Electrospray was performed directly from the analytical column by applying the electrospray ionization (ESI) voltage at a tee (150 μm ID, Upchurch Scientific) directly downstream of a 1:1,000 split flow to reduce the flow rate to 300 nl/min through the columns. MudPIT experiments (10-step) were performed in which each step corresponds to 0, 10, 20, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 , and 100% buffer C (500 mM of ammonium acetate, 0.1% formic acid, and 5% acetonitrile) and was run for 3 min at the beginning of a 110-min gradient.
Data analysis. Protein and peptide identification were performed with Integrated Proteomics Pipeline-IP2 (Integrated Proteomics Applications, San Diego, CA. http://www. integratedproteomics.com/) using ProLuCID and DTASelect2 algorithms. DTASelect parameters were-p 2 -y 1-trypstat-pfp .01 -extra-pI-DB-dm-in. Spectrum raw files were extracted into ms2 files from raw files using open source RawExtract 1.9.9 (Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA; http://fields.scripps.edu/downloads.php), and the tandem mass spectra were searched against a human protein database (UniprotKB). To accurately estimate peptide probabilities and false discovery rates, we used a decoy database containing the reversed sequences of all the proteins appended to the target database. Tandem mass spectra were matched to sequences using the ProLuCID algorithm with a 600-ppm peptide mass tolerance. ProLuCID searches were done on an Intel Xeon cluster processor running under the Linux operating system. The search space included half and fully tryptic peptide candidates that fell within the mass tolerance window with no miscleavage constraint. Carbamidomethylation (+57.02146 Da) of cysteine was considered as a static modification. siRNA screening A549 cells (1,000 cells/well) in a 384-well plate were reverse transfected with 0.5 pmol of siRNA pool (S2 Table) targeting each gene using 0.1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (Thermo Fisher Scientific) (final siRNA concentration was 10 nM), followed by incubation at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 . At 72 h post-transfection, cells were infected (MOI = 0.05) with rLCMV/ZsG. siRNA target host-cell proteins were selected based on availability of validated siRNA sequences. The siRNAs we used to examine the effects on LCMV multiplication of knockdown expression of NP-interacting host cell protein candidate hits corresponded to the Genome-wide ON TAR-GET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene; Dharmacon, Lafayette, CO).
A549 cells (3.0 x 10 4 cells/well) were reverse transfected in a 24-well plate with 6 pmol of siRNA pools targeting each gene using 1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (final siRNA concentration is 10 nM). At 72 h post-transfection, total cell lysate was prepared in modified lysis A buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl [pH = 8.0], 50 mM NaCl, 1%Triton X-100, 1.25% sodium deoxycholate) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. The total protein concentration of clarified cell lysate was measured by Pierce BCA Protein Assay Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The same amount of protein from each sample was subjected to SDS-PAGE, and the protein expression of siRNA-targeted genes was analyzed by western blots.
Cells infected with eGFP-or ZsGreen-expressing rLCMV were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. After cell permeabilization by treatment with DB, cells were stained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). Green fluorescence (eGFP or ZsGreen) and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, Bio-Tek, Winooski, VT).
Mock-and virus-infected cells were fixed with 4% PFA. After cell permeabilization and blocking by treatment with DB containing 1% normal goat serum, cells were incubated with primary mouse anti ATP1A1 or PHB antibody followed by secondary anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluore 568 (anti-mouse IgG-AF568). Subsequently, cells were stained with VL-4-AF488. In some samples, primary antibody against ATP1A1 or PHB was omitted to determine background fluorescence. To visualize nuclei, DAPI Fluoromount-G (SouthernBiotech, Birmingham, AL) was used to mount coverslips on a slide glass. Stained cells were observed under a confocal microscope (LSM 710, Zeiss) and data analyzed by ZEN software (Zeiss). Co-localization analysis was performed on a pixel by pixel basis using Zen software (Zeiss). Eight green (NP-positive) cells were marked and every pixel in the marked area was plotted in the scatter diagram based on its intensity level from each channel. Thresholds for green and red channels were determined using mock-infected cells stained with VL-4-AF488 (anti-NP) and anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluor 568, without using anti-ATP1A1 or -PHB antibodies. Each pixel was assigned a value of 1. Co-localization coefficients (CC) (or non-weighted CC) were determined by dividing the sum of both green-and red-positive pixels by the sum of green positive pixels. This calculation was repeated for eight individual cells. To assess the specificity of co-localization, we determined weighted CC by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal. Comparison of non-weighted and weighted CC allowed us to determine whether brighter pixels were present in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions. p values were determined by a two-tailed paired t test using GraphPad Prism software.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 2 h, followed by infection with rLCMV/eGFP (MOI = 0.01). Compounds were present to study endpoint. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS, and eGFP expression was examined by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated and rLCMV/eGFP-infected cells were set to 100%. The IC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded in a 96-well plate (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions and cultured at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 48 h. Then, CellTiter 96 AQ ueous one solution reagent (Promega, Madison, WI) was added. Thereafter, the assay was performed according to the manufacturer's recommendations, and the absorbance (490 nm) was obtained using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) reader (SPECTRA max plus 384; Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated cells were set to 100%. The CC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A plasmid expressing C-terminus Strep-tagged Z protein (pC-LCMV-Z-Strep) was generated using similar procedure to generate a plasmid expressing C-terminus FLAG-tagged LASV Z protein (pC-LASV-Z-FLAG), and the budding assay was performed as previously described [88] . Cells (HEK 293T) in a 12-well plate were transfected with 0.5 μg of empty pCAGGS vector or pC-LCMV-Z-Strep or pC-LASV-Z-FLAG using Lipofectamine 2000. At 5 h post-transfection, media were replaced with fresh media and incubated at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 19 h. Then the cells were three times washed with fresh medium. After the removal of the last wash medium, cells were cultured in fresh medium containing ouabain (30 or 40 nM) or rocaglamide (50 or 100 nM) or equivalent concentration of DMSO, and 24 h later, virion-like particle (VLP)-containing TCS and cells were collected. Total cell lysate was prepared by lysing the cells with lysis buffer (1% NP-40, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 62.5 mM NaCl, 0.4% sodium deoxycholate). After clarification of TCS from cell debris by centrifugation at 400 x g and 4˚C for 10 min, VLPs were collected by ultracentrifugation at 100,000 x g and 4˚C for 30 min through a 20% sucrose cushion. VLPs were resuspended in PBS, and Z expression in total cell lysate and TCS (containing VLPs) were analyzed by western blots.
A549 cells infected with rLCMV/eGFP were harvested using Accutase cell detachment solution (Innovative Cell Technologies, San Diego, CA) and fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. eGFP expression was examined by flow cytometry using a BD LSR II (Becton Dickson), and data were analyzed with FlowJo (Tree Star, Inc., Ashland, OR).
293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected with scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were three times washed with fresh media to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of 40 nM of ouabain or vehicle control (DMSO). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayers of BHK-21 cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. Total cell lysate was prepared in cell lysis buffer (150 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% [NP-40], 1 mM of EDTA] and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. ZsGreen signal intensity in clarified cell lysate was measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek).
A549 cells seeded (2 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with combinations of different concentrations of ouabain and rocaglamide for 2 h and then infected (MOI = 0.01) with rLCMV/eGFP. Compounds were present in the culture medium throughout the experiment. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed, permeabilized by treatment with DB, and stained with DAPI. eGFP and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). eGFP readouts were normalized by DAPI readouts, and normalized data were used to analyze synergistic effect of the two compounds by the MacSynergy II program [89] .
Data were analyzed for p values by a two-tailed unpaired t test using GraphPad Prism software. | What does ouabain inhibit? | 5,156 | ATP1A1 | 14,259 |
1,687 | Interactome analysis of the lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus nucleoprotein in infected cells reveals ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit Alpha 1 and prohibitin as host-cell factors involved in the life cycle of mammarenaviruses
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834214/
SHA: efbd0dfc426da5dd25ce29411d6fa37571623773
Authors: Iwasaki, Masaharu; Minder, Petra; Caì, Yíngyún; Kuhn, Jens H.; Yates, John R.; Torbett, Bruce E.; de la Torre, Juan C.
Date: 2018-02-20
DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892
License: cc0
Abstract: Several mammalian arenaviruses (mammarenaviruses) cause hemorrhagic fevers in humans and pose serious public health concerns in their endemic regions. Additionally, mounting evidence indicates that the worldwide-distributed, prototypic mammarenavirus, lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance. Concerns about human-pathogenic mammarenaviruses are exacerbated by of the lack of licensed vaccines, and current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to off-label use of ribavirin that is only partially effective. Detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions may facilitate the development of novel anti-mammarenavirus strategies by targeting components of the host-cell machinery that are required for efficient virus multiplication. Here we document the generation of a recombinant LCMV encoding a nucleoprotein (NP) containing an affinity tag (rLCMV/Strep-NP) and its use to capture the NP-interactome in infected cells. Our proteomic approach combined with genetics and pharmacological validation assays identified ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit alpha 1 (ATP1A1) and prohibitin (PHB) as pro-viral factors. Cell-based assays revealed that ATP1A1 and PHB are involved in different steps of the virus life cycle. Accordingly, we observed a synergistic inhibitory effect on LCMV multiplication with a combination of ATP1A1 and PHB inhibitors. We show that ATP1A1 inhibitors suppress multiplication of Lassa virus and Candid#1, a live-attenuated vaccine strain of Junín virus, suggesting that the requirement of ATP1A1 in virus multiplication is conserved among genetically distantly related mammarenaviruses. Our findings suggest that clinically approved inhibitors of ATP1A1, like digoxin, could be repurposed to treat infections by mammarenaviruses pathogenic for humans.
Text: Introduction Mammarenaviruses (Arenaviridae: Mammarenavirus) cause chronic infections of rodents worldwide [1] . Invasion of human dwellings by infected rodents can result in human infections through mucosal exposure to aerosols or by direct contact of abraded skin with infectious material. Several mammarenaviruses cause viral hemorrhagic fevers (VHFs) in humans and pose important public health problems in their endemic areas [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] . Mammarenaviruses are classified into two main groups, Old World (OW) and New World (NW) [1] . The OW Lassa virus (LASV), causative agent of Lassa fever (LF), is the most significant OW mammarenaviral pathogen. LASV is estimated to infect several hundred thousand individuals annually in Western Africa, resulting in a high number of LF cases associated with high morbidity and lethality. Moreover, LASV endemic regions are expanding [7] , and the association of the recently identified mammarenavirus Lujo virus with a VHF outbreak in Southern Africa [8, 9] has raised concerns about the emergence of novel VHF-causing mammarenaviruses. The most significant NW mammarenavirus is Junín virus (JUNV), which causes Argentinian hemorrhagic fever [10] . The worldwide-distributed OW mammarenavirus lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance especially in congenital infections [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] . Moreover, LCMV poses a particular threat to immunocompromised individuals, as has been illustrated by fatal cases of LCMV infection associated with organ transplants [16, 17] . However, LCMV research can be safely performed at BSL-2 containment, rather than the BSL-4 containment necessary for live LASV or JUNV research [18] .
No US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-licensed vaccines are available for the treatment of arenavirus infections, although a live attenuated vaccine strain of JUNV, Candid#1, is licensed in Argentina. Likewise, current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to an offlabel use of the nucleoside analogue ribavirin that is only partially effective and can cause significant side effects [19] [20] [21] . Development of effective anti-mammarenavirus drugs has been hampered by the lack of detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions required for mammarenavirus multiplication that could represent amenable targets for antiviral therapy. the potential problem that overexpression of a single viral gene product may potentiate PPI interactions that are not relevant during the course of a natural virus infection. To overcome this issue, we designed a recombinant LCMV (rLCMV) encoding a tandem [WSHPQFEK (GGGS) 3 WSHPQFEK] Strep-tag fused to the amino-terminus of NP (rLCMV/Strep-NP) (Fig 1A and 1B) . To facilitate the identification of specific PPI between NP and host cell proteins, we used our mammarenavirus tri-segmented (r3) platform [30] to design an r3LCMV expressing a C-terminus Strep-tag version of enhanced green fluorescent protein (r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep) that we used as a negative control (Fig 1A and 1B) . We rescued rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep and confirmed the expression of strep-tagged NP and eGFP in rLCMV/ Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, respectively (Fig 1C) . Next, we examined the growth properties of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep in three different cells lines from hamsters, humans, and nonhuman primates (BHK-21, A549, and Vero E6 cells, respectively) (Fig 1D) . The fitness of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep was modestly decreased compared to that observed with wild-type (WT) Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and Clone 13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains of LCMV. However, both rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep had WT-like growth kinetics and reached high titers. As with WT LCMV, infection with rLCMV/Strep-NP prevented production of bioactive IFN-I by cells in response to Sendai virus (SeV) infection as determined using an IFN bioassay based on protection against the cytopathic effect (CPE) induced by infection with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) (Fig 1E) . Vero cells treated for 16 h with tissue cultured supernatants (TCS) from A549 cells infected first with WT LCMV or rLCMV/Strep, followed by 24 h infection with SeV, remained fully susceptible to VSV-induced CPE. In contrast, Vero cells treated with TCS from A549 cells infected with rLCMV/NP(D382A), a mutant unable to prevent induction of IFN-I [30] , and subsequently with SeV, were protected against VSV induced CPE.
We selected the human A549 cell line because lung epithelial cells are one of the initial cell targets of humans following inhalation of mammarenavirions. We infected A549 cells (multiplicity of infection [MOI] = 0.1) with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep (Fig 2A) . At 48 h post-inoculation (pi), we prepared total cell lysates for pull-down (PD) assays using a sepharose resin coated with strep-tactin. Aliquots of the protein complexes present in the PD samples were fractionated by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) (Fig 2B) followed by SYPRO Ruby protein gel staining. We compared the pattern of stained protein bands detected between rLCMV/Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strepinfected samples and confirmed the presence of Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep in pertinent samples (Fig 2B) . Protein complexes in the rest of eluates from the PD samples were concentrated by trichloroacetic acid (TCA) precipitation and subjected to trypsin digestion (Fig 2A) . Digested peptides were subjected to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) analysis using a hybrid mass spectrometer consisting of linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap (LTQ) Velos and an Orbitrap analyser.
We classified host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS analysis from two independent biological replicates into two groups: 1) proteins found only in Strep-NP PD samples with at least five spectral counts ( Table 1) , and 2) proteins found in both Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep PD samples with five or higher spectral counts in Strep-NP samples and at least 2-fold higher spectral counts in Strep-NP PD compared to eGFP PD samples ( Table 2) . Filtering the data using these criteria resulted in identification of 139 candidate host-cell proteins as NP-interacting partners. Among 53 proteins found present in both NP-and eGFP-PD samples, 36 had spectral counts in the NP-PD sample that were less than two-fold higher than their corresponding spectral counts in the eGFP-PD sample (Fig 2C and S1 Table) . Based on the criteria we described above, we considered these proteins to be highly unlikely specific NPinteractors with an involvement in the LCMV life cycle, and therefore we did not consider these hits for further analysis. However, we acknowledge that we cannot formally rule out that some of these hits could still play a role on the life cycle of LCMV.
The protein annotation through evolutionary relationship (PANTHER) protein family classification (Biological Process) of the NP-interacting protein candidates revealed that a large number of proteins were involved in metabolic and cellular processes (Fig 2D) . We also analyzed the molecular functions of the NP-interacting protein candidates according to the PAN-THER protein profile classification (Fig 2E) , which revealed diversified biochemical functions enriched for nucleic acid-binding proteins and chaperones.
To initially assess pro-or anti-viral roles of NP-interacting host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS, we examined the effect of small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated knockdown (kd) of each of the corresponding genes on multiplication of rLCMV expressing reporter gene ZsGreen (ZsG) in A549 cells (Fig 3A) . The siRNAs we used were from the genome-wide ON TARGET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene). OTPs are latest generation of siRNAs and offer significant advantages over previous generations. Off-target effects are primarily driven by antisense strand microRNA (miR)-like seed activity. In OTPs, the sense strand is modified to favor antisense strand uptake whereas the antisense strand seed region is modified to drastically reduce seed-related off-targeting [33] . In addition, OTPs are designed on the foundation of the SMARTselection algorithm (Dharmacon), widely considered to be the best algorithm for rational siRNA design strategy. Numerous host-cell factors showed an anti-LCMV effect (increased ZsG expression by kd of the genes), including microtubule-associated protein 1B (MAP1B) [ [38] , dengue virus 2 (DENV-2) [39] , and chikungunya virus (CHIKV) [40] .
To begin assessing the potential biological implications of the identified NP-host cell protein interactions, we selected ATP1A1 and PHB given the availability of reagents, existing knowledge about their roles in cell physiology, and evidence of participation in multiplication of other viruses. We confirmed that cells transfected with siRNA specific to ATP1A1 and PHB exhibited the predicted reduced levels in ATP1A1 and PHB protein expression (Fig 3B) . Likewise, we examined whether siRNA-mediated reduced expression levels of ZsGreen correlated with reduced LCMV progeny titers. For this, we transfected A549 cells with siRNA targeting Expression of Strep-tagged proteins. A549 cells seeded (5.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 6-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMVs. At 48 h pi, total cell lysates were prepared, and protein expression was analyzed by western blotting. (D) Growth properties of rLCMV expressing Strep-tagged proteins. BHK-21 (1.75 x 10 5 cells/well), A549 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well), or Vero E6 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well) cells seeded in 24-well plates and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.01) with the indicated rLCMVs. At the indicated times pi, TCSs were collected and virus titers determined by IFFA. Results represent means ± SD of the results of three independent experiments. (E) Lack of induction of IFN-I in cells infected with rLCMV/Strep-NP. A549 cells were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMV or mock-infected, and 36 h later infected with SeV (MOI = 1). At 24 h pi with SeV, TCS were collected and used, following virus inactivation by U.V., to treat Vero E6 cells for 16 h, followed by infection with rVSV (MOI = 0.1) [rVSV(+)] or mockinfection [rVSV (-) ]. At 24 h pi with rVSV, cells were fixed with 4% PFA and stained with crystal violet to assess rVSV-induced cytopathic effect. We used as control rLCMV/NP(D382A) that contains mutation D382A within NP, which has been shown to abrogate the NP's ability to counteract the induction of IFN-I production.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892.g001 ATP1A1 or with NC siRNA 72 h prior to infection with rLCMV/ZsG. We found that siRNAmediated kd of ATP1A1 dramatically inhibited ZsGreen expression (Fig 3Ci) , which was associated with a significant reduction of infectious LCMV progeny (Fig 3Cii) . Our attempts to see interaction between NP and ATP1A1 or NP and PHB by co-immunoprecipitation were unsuccessful. Several possibilities could account for this, including interactions of low affinity or high on/off rate or both. Another consideration is that only a minor fraction of NP might be engaged in the interaction with a given host cell protein, and therefore, detection of these interactions would require highly sensitive methods such as LC-MS/MS. To overcome this problem we used confocal microscopy to examine the co-localization of NP with ATP1A1 and PHB in LCMV-infected cells. Weighted co-localization coefficients (CC), determined by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal, were significantly higher than non-weighted CC, indicating the presence of brighter pixels in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions (Fig 4) .
The cardiac glycoside ouabain is an inhibitor of ATP1A1 that has been used to treat congestive heart failure in European countries [41] . The PHB inhibitor rocaglamide is a flavagline from an Aglaia tree used in traditional Chinese medicine [42] that has potent anticancer activity [43] . To examine whether pharmacological inhibition of ATP1A1 or PHB inhibited LCMV multiplication, we pretreated human (A549 and HEK 293T), nonhuman primate (Vero E6), and rodent (murine L929 and hamster BHK-21) cells with ouabain or rocaglamide and infected them with rLCMV/eGFP (S1 Fig). Ouabain treatment resulted in a strong dosedependent inhibition of eGFP expression in infected human-and nonhuman primate cells, but did not affect eGFP expression intensity in infected rodent cells (S1A Fig) . This finding is consistent with rodents expressing an ATP1A1 allele that is resistant to ouabain inhibition [44] .
Likewise, we observed a dose-dependent rocaglamide inhibition of eGFP expression in all cell lines infected with rLCMV/eGFP (S1B Fig) . Consistent with these findings, production of infectious LCMV progeny was reduced by treatment with either ouabain or rocaglamide ( Fig 5A) within a concentration range that had minimal impact on cell viability (Fig 5B) . To examine the correlation between efficacy and cytotoxicity of these compounds, we determined their therapeutic index (TI = CC 50 /IC 50 (Fig 5Bi) ; whereas rocaglamide had TIs of >105 (CC 50 > 1000 nM, IC 50 = 9.51 nM) and 10.3 (CC 50 = 100 nM, IC 50 = 9.75 nM) in A549 and Vero E6 cells, respectively (Fig 5Bii) . Moreover, the ATP1A1 antagonist inhibitor, bufalin, also exhibited robust anti-LCMV activity with TIs of 8.92 (CC 50 Heat shock protein HSP 90-alpha HSP90AA1 P07900 8 10 9
Endoplasmin HSP90B1 P14625 9 9 9
Large neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1 SLC7A5 Q01650 6 12 9
Keratin, type II cuticular Hb1 KRT81 Q14533 10 8 9
Putative helicase MOV-10 MOV10 Q9HCE1 8 10 9
Microtubule-associated protein 1B MAP1B P46821 6 11 8.5
Spectrin beta chain, rocaglamide (100 nM) (Fig 5C) , further supporting a specific anti-LCMV activity of ouabain and rocaglamide that was not due to reduced cell viability.
To gain insights about the mechanisms by which ouabain and rocaglamide exert their anti-LCMV activity, we examined effects of these compounds on distinct steps of the LCMV life cycle. First, we asked whether ouabain and rocaglamide affected cell entry of LCMV. We conducted time-of-addition experiments in which we treated cells with ouabain or rocaglamide prior to virus inoculation (-1.5 h), at the time of inoculation (0 h), or 1.5 h pi (+1.5 h) (Fig 6A) .
In some samples, we used ammonium chloride starting at 4 h pi to block multiple rounds of virus infection. The timing of compound addition did not significantly change the number of eGFP-positive cells, indicating that neither ouabain nor rocaglamide inhibited cell entry of LCMV. The number of eGFP + cells in ouabain-treated cells was reduced at all time-of-addition points compared to vehicle dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-treated cells, but was similar to that observed in ammonium chloride-treated cells. Thus, ouabain did not inhibit LCMV RNA replication and gene expression, but rather a late step of the LCMV life cycle. In contrast, rocaglamide treatment resulted in a negligible number of eGFP + cells, indicating that rocaglamide inhibited virus RNA replication and gene transcription.
To further investigate the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis, we infected A549 cells with a recombinant single-cycle infectious LCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) and treated cells with either ouabain or rocaglamide. Seventy-two hours later, we determined percent normalized eGFP expression in infected cells (Fig 6B) . Consistent with our results from the time-of-addition experiment, ouabain did not affect reporter eGFP expression. However, rocaglamide reduced eGFP expression, confirming inhibitory effect of rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis.
We also examined the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on the late step of the arenavirus life cycle, Z-mediated budding. For this experiment, we transfected cells with Z-Strep-and Z-FLAG (DYKDDDDK epitope)-expressing plasmids from LCMV and LASV, respectively. At 24 h post-transfection, we removed the tissue culture supernatant (TCS) and washed extensively transfected cells to eliminate already budded Z. We cultured the transfected cells in the presence or absence of ouabain or rocaglamide. At 24 h, we determined by WB levels of Z protein in both whole cell lysates and associated with virus-like particles (VLPs) collected from TCS. Treatment with rocaglamide, but not with ouabain, caused a reduction in both LCMV and LASV Z budding efficiency (Fig 6C and 6D) . The reproducibility of these findings was confirmed based on results from four independent experiments (Fig 6E) . We also examined whether ouabain could interfere with a step of assembly of infectious progeny that was not captured by the Z budding assay through two additional experiments. The first experiment involved the use of a newly generated single-cycle infectious recombinant LCMV expressing the reporter gene ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP) to infect (MOI = 0.1) A549 cells (1 st infection). These cells were subsequently transfected with a plasmid expressing LCMV GPC. After 24 h, we used TCS to infect a fresh cell monolayer (2 nd infection) and identified infected cells based on ZsGreen expression. To assess the effect of ouabain on de novo assembly of infectious progeny we determined normalized ratios (2 nd /1 st infection) of ZsGreen + cells (Fig 6F) . The second experiment involved infection (MOI = 0.1) of cells with WT LCMV, and 48 h later we washed infected cells three times to remove the extracellular infectious progeny produced during the first 48 h of infection. Then, fresh media containing ouabain or DMSO vehicle control were added, and 24 h later we determined virus titers in TCS (Fig 6G) . Results from both experiments consistently showed that ouabain did not inhibit assembly de novo of extracellular infectious virus.
Combination therapy can significantly alleviate the problem posed by the rapid emergence of drug-resistant variants commonly observed during monotherapy strategies to control RNA virus infections. Since ouabain and rocaglamide inhibited different steps of the LCMV life cycle, we examined whether their use in combination results in a synergistic anti-LCMV effect. For this experiment, we infected A549 cells with rLCMV/eGFP and treated them with ouabain and rocaglamide using different concentrations and combinations. At 48 h pi, we determined percent eGFP expression (Fig 7) . Combination treatment with ouabain and rocaglamide resulted in synergistic anti-LCMV activity that was enhanced under conditions using higher concentrations of ouabain and lower concentrations of rocaglamide.
We next asked whether the ATP1A1 and PHB host-cell factors contributed also to multiplication of viral hemorrhagic fever-causing LASV. We treated A549 cells with ouabain, bufalin, or rocaglamide and inoculated the treated cells with recombinant LASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP). eGFP expression was examined 48 h later. Similar to rLCMV infection, LASV multiplication was restricted in ouabain-, bufalin-, or rocaglamide-treated cells at concentrations minimally impacting cell viability, although their IC 50 values were slightly higher than those found with the LCMV infection system (Fig 5B and S2 Fig) as ouabain had IC 50 of 9.34 nM, bufalin had IC 50 of 1.66 nM and rocaglamide had IC 50 of 37.0 nM (Fig 8) . We also tested the effect of compounds targeting ATP1A1 and PHB on multiplication of JUNV. Consistent with our results obtained with LCMV and LASV, ouabain, bufalin, and rocaglamide strongly suppressed JUNV multiplication (S3 Fig). These findings indicate that ATP1A1 and PHB function as pro-viral factors of a range of mammarenaviruses.
We identified ATP1A1 and PHB as novel host-cell proteins that contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses. Our approach using a recombinant LCMV expressing NP with an affinity tag facilitated defining the NP interactome in the context of LCMV infection. Recently, using an NP-specific monoclonal antibody (mAb) to precipitate NP and associated cellular protein partners in a mammarenavirus NP interactome, King et al. identified 348 host proteins that associated with LCMV NP [45] . We found 99 common proteins between our filtered LCMV NP interactome of 171 proteins and the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. Differences in both experimental conditions and analysis methodologies used to generate the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. and ours likely h post-transfection, cells were washed with fresh media to eliminate Z-mediated production of VLPs in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain or Roc-A at the indicated concentrations. VLPs present in TCS were collected by ultracentrifugation, and cell lysates were prepared. Z protein expression in VLPs and cell lysates were determined by western blots using antibodies to Strep-tag (C) and FLAG-tag (D). Budding efficiency for each sample was estimated by dividing the signal intensity of the Z protein associated with VLPs by that of Z detected in the cell lysate. Numbers on the bottom of panel C correspond to LCMV Z budding efficiencies determined in a representative experiment. Results shown in panel E correspond to the average and SD from four independent experiments including the one shown in panel D. The mean budding efficiency of DMSO treatedsamples was set to 100%. Data represent mean ± SD of four independent experiments. (F) Effect of ouabain on incorporation of viral glycoprotein into virions. 293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with scrLCMV/ZsG (1 st infection) for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were washed with fresh medium to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain at 40 nM (OUA). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayer of BHK-21 cells (2 nd infection) seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. ZsGreen signal intensity was measured by a fluorescent plate reader. GP-incorporation efficiency was estimated by dividing ZsGreen signal intensity in BHK-21 cell lysate (2 nd ) by that in 293T cell lysate (1 st ). The mean GP-incorporation efficiency of DMSO treated samples was set to 100%. Data represent means ± SD from three independent experiments. contributed to the observed differences between data sets. Despite progress in the implementation of global proteomics-based screens to identify virus-host protein-protein interactions, overlap between datasets for the same viral system is usually limited. However, the substantial overlap of 99 of the 171 NP-interacting proteins from both studies supports the overall reliability of both systems. We used results of the eGFP-Strep interactome, determined in r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, as a control to filter out non-specific NP interactions, which may have resulted in a higher degree of stringency than in the study by King et al for selection of NP-interacting candidates. The combined information provided by the NP interactome reported by King et al. and the one we present in this work, will facilitate future studies to further characterize the functional and biological implications of NP-host cell interacting proteins.
All tested mammarenavirus NPs, with exception of the NP from TCRV, blocked IRF-3-dependent IFN-I induction [25, 46] . The anti-IFN activity of NP was mapped to its C-terminal part and linked to the 3'-5' exonuclease domain present with the NP C-terminal part [30] . Inhibitor-B kinase ε (IKKε) was identified as an NP-binding protein using plasmid-mediated overexpression in transfected cells [47] , and the NP-IKKε binding affinity correlated with NP's ability to inhibit IFN-I induction [47] . We, as well as the work by King et al. [45] , did not detect this NP-IKKε interaction. This discrepancy may have been caused by very low expression of IKKε in LCMV-infected cells, which prevented detection of IKKε by LC-MS/MS. Alternatively, NP-IKKε interaction could possibility be temporarily regulated and take place at early times pi, but could be mostly absent at 48 h pi, the time at which we prepared the cell lysates for our proteomics studies. Future studies comparing the NP interactome at different times during infection will contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics of NP/hostcell protein interactions.
Na + /K + -ATPase is a well-characterized membrane ion transporter and is composed of two functional subunits (α and β) and one regulatory γ subunit [48] . ATP1A1 represents one of four α subunits [49, 50] . Recent evidence has suggested that the Na + /K + -ATPase is involved in multiple cell signaling pathways that are independent of its ion-pumping function [51] . Cardiac glycoside inhibitors of the Na + /K + -ATPase (NKA), so-called cardiotonic steroids (CST; e.g., ouabain, bufalin), have been shown to inhibit multiplication of different viruses including Ebola virus [35], coronaviruses [36], herpes simplex virus 1 [52, 53] , CHIKV [54] , human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) [55] , adenovirus [56] and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 1 [57] .
Different mechanisms are likely to contribute to the antiviral activity of CSTs, including altered cell functions modulated by the signaling activity of Na + /K + -ATPase [58] . Thus, a low concentration of ouabain induces a conformational change in ATP1A1 that results in activation and release of proto-oncogene tyrosine protein kinase, Src, from ATP1A1, followed by activation of as yet unknown downstream signaling that inhibits, for instance, cell entry of murine hepatitis virus (MHV) [59] . However, our results indicated that ouabain did not interfere with LCMV cell entry. In addition, treatment with the Src inhibitor 4-amino-5-(4-methylphenyl)-7-(t-butyl)pyrazolo [3,4-d] pyrimidine (PP1) did not counteract the anti-LCMV activity of ouabain (S4 Fig). Nevertheless, ATP1A1-mediated Src signaling could plausibly contribute to the inhibitory effect of ouabain on JUNV multiplication as similarly to that observed with MHV. Moreover, cell entry of JUNV occurs also by clathrin-mediated endocytosis [60] , a process affected by Src signaling. Ouabain has been clinically used in several European countries for the management of congestive heart failure, whereas bufalin has been tested in clinical trials for cancer treatments [61] , and the CST digoxin has been FDA-approved since 1997 to treat heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Hence, opportunities for the repurposing CSTs have potential as therapeutics to treat infections caused by viral hemorrhagic fever-causing arenaviruses.
The PHB inhibitor, rocaglamide, appeared to interfere with LCMV RNA synthesis and budding, but did not affect LCMV cell entry. In contrast, PHB was reported to be a cell entry receptor for DENV-2 [39] and CHIKV [40] . On the other hand, PHB did not act as a virus cell entry receptor for HCV. Rather, PHB contributed to HCV cell entry through binding to cellular RAF (c-Raf; proto-oncogene serine/threonine-protein kinase) and subsequent Harvey rat sarcoma proto-oncogene (HRas) activation that induces a signal transduction pathway required for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mediated HCV cell entry [37] . In addition, siRNA-mediated kd of PHB decreased production of H5N1 FLUAV [38] . These findings indicate that PHB is involved in different steps of the life cycle of a variety of viruses, and thereby an attractive target for the development of broad-spectrum antiviral drugs.
Rocaglate is a group of natural compounds, which includes rocaglamide, that inhibits protein synthesis by targeting the ATP-dependent DEAD-box RNA helicase eukaryotic initiation factor 4A (eIF4A) and exerts anti-tumor activity [62, 63] . The rocaglate compound, silvestrol, inhibits Ebola virus multiplication likely by interfering with the role of eIF4A in viral protein translation [64] .
While we focused on two host proteins, ATP1A1 and PHB, in this study, our proteomics approach also identified several NP-interacting host-cell proteins whose kd expression via siRNA resulted in increased LCMV multiplication. These proteins, which included MAP1B, might have anti-LCMV activity. MAP1B has been shown to bind to nonstructural proteins 1 (NS1) and 2 (NS2) of human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) [34] . NS1 and NS2 of HRSV antagonizes host IFN-I response by reducing the levels of TNF receptor associated factor (TRAF3), IKKε (NS1), and STAT2 (NS2) [65] . NS2-MAP1B interaction interfered with HRSV NS2's ability to reduce levels of STAT2, whereas the role of NS1-MAP1B interaction remains to be determined [34] . Examining the role of NP-MAP1B interaction in modulating NP's ability to inhibit induction of type I IFN is of interest.
We identified among the NP-interacting host cell proteins the RNA helicase Moloney leukemia virus 10 (MOV10), which has been reported to be an antiviral factor for FLUAV [66] , retroviruses [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] , and DENV-2 [72] . We did not observe increased LCMV multiplication in cells subjected to siRNA-mediated kd of MOV10, a finding that would question an anti-LCMV activity of MOV10. However, we consider that LCMV has already optimal multiplication in A549 cells and further increases may occur only under rather unique conditions. MOV10 was shown to enhance IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction following SeV infection through a tank binding kinase 1 (TBK1)-independent and IKKε-dependent manner. This finding was further supported by demonstrating MOV10-IKKε interaction by co-immunoprecipitation studies [73] . We documented that the anti-IFN activity of mammarenavirus NP correlated with its ability to interact with IKKε [47] . Whether NP-MOV10 interaction prevents MOV10 from enhancing IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction remains to be determined.
Several members of the mammalian chaperonin-containing T-complex (CCT) were identified as prominent hits in our NP interactome. The mammalian CCT is critical for folding of many proteins with important functions in diverse cellular processes [74] , and may protect complex protein topologies within its central cavity during biosynthesis and folding [75] . The contribution of CCT members to NP assembly into a nucleocapsid structure could account for their presence in the NP, but not eGFP, interactome. Interestingly, members of the CCT have been implicated in multiplication of different viruses including rabies virus [76, 77] , HCV [78] and FLUAV [79] . However, the role of these CCT proteins in virus multiplication remains unknown and may involve functions other than acting as molecular chaperones.
Previous studies documented the presence of several components of the of eIF4F, including 4A, within viral replication-transcription complexes (RTC) detected in cells infected with LCMV [80] and TCRV [81] . These findings, together with the detection of a number of ribosomal proteins in the NP interactome, suggest that translation of viral mRNAs may take place within RTC. However, rocaglamide interference with the activity of eIF4A within the viral RTC might contribute to its anti-LCMV activity.
In this work, we documented the generation of rLCMV/Strep-NP and its use to define the NP-interactome in infected cells. We presented evidence that ATP1A1 and PHB contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses using genetics and pharmacological inhibition of the genes. Consistent with our findings, bioinformatic analysis revealed that the protein network associated with ATP1A1 and PHB involves host cell proteins with functions in biological processes that have been implicated in virus multiplication (S5 Fig). The overall experimental approach described here can facilitate the identification of biologically relevant NP-interacting host-cell proteins. Future studies elucidating the roles of pro-and antiviral host-cell factors identified in this study in mammarenavirus multiplication will advance our understanding of the multiple functions of NP and uncover novel cellular targets for the development of antimammarenaviral drugs. In addition, by identifying proviral host-cell factors, drugs that are already approved can be repurposing as therapeutics to combat human pathogenic mammarenavirus infections.
Baby hamster kidney BHK-21 (American Type Culture Collection, ATCC, CCL-10), house mouse L929 (ATCC CCL-1), grivet Vero E6 (ATCC CRL-1586), human A549 (ATCC CCL-185), and human HEK 293T (ATCC CRL-3216) cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) containing 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, 2 mM of L-glutamine, 100 mg/ml of streptomycin, and 100 U/ml of penicillin at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 .
WT recombinant LCMVs, Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and clone-13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains, were generated as described [30, 82, 83] . Generation of rLCMV/NP(D382A) and SeV, strain Cantell, was described [30, 82, 83 ]. An rLCMV lacking GPC and expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) was generated by reverse genetics using procedures previously described [84] . rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep were generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate WT rLCMV and tri-segmented LCMV (r3LCMV) expressing eGFP [30] . For the generation of these novel rLCMVs, we created pol1S Cl-13 plasmids that directed Pol1-mediated intracellular synthesis of recombinant LCMV S genome RNA species coding for Strep-tagged NP or eGFP, respectively (Fig 1A and 1B) . The rLCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMV/eGFP) was generated as described [85] , and the rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (rLCMV/ZsG) instead of eGFP was generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMV/eGFP. Generation of rLASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP) will be described elsewhere. A tri-segmented recombinant live-attenuated Candid #1 strain of JUNV expressing eGFP (r3JUNV/eGFP) was generated as described [86] . For the generation of a novel single cycle rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP), a pol1S plasmid was created by omitting GPC open reading frame (ORF) from pol1S plasmid used for the generation of rLCMV/ZsG. scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP was rescued by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP [84] .
LCMV titers were determined by immunofocus forming assay (IFFA) as described [87] . Briefly, 10-fold serial virus dilutions were used to infect Vero E6 cell monolayers in a 96-well plate, and at 20 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). After cell permeabilization by treatment with dilution buffer (DB) (0.3% Triton X-100 in PBS-containing 3% bovine serum albumin [BSA]), cells were stained with a rat mAb to NP (VL-4, Bio X Cell, West Lebanon, NH) conjugated with Alexa Fluor 488 (VL-4-AF488, Protein Labeling Kit, Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA). VSV titers were determined by a plaque assay.
Total cell lysates were prepared in PD lysis buffer (+) (250 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% TritonX-100, 10% glycerol, 1 mM of MgCl 2 , 1 μM of CaCl 2 , 1 μM of ZnCl 2 ) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Clarified lysates were mixed at a 1:1 ratio with loading buffer (100 mM of Tris [pH 6.8], 20% 2-mercaptoethanol, 4% SDS, 0.2% bromophenol blue, 20% glycerol) and boiled for 5 min. Proteins samples were fractionated by SDS-PAGE using 4-20% gradient polyacrylamide gels (Mini-PROTEAN TGX gels 4-20%, Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA), and proteins were transferred by electroblotting onto polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Immobilin Transfer Membranes, Millipore, Billerica, MA). To detect Strep-tagged proteins, membranes were reacted with mouse monoclonal antibodies to Strep (QIAGEN, Germantown, MD), eGFP (Takara Bio USA, Mountain View, CA), GP 2 (We33/ 36), ATP1A1 (TehrmoFisher Scientific, Rockford, IL), PHB (Abcam, Cambridge, MA) or rabbit polyclonal antibodies to α-tubulin (Cell Signaling Technologies, Danvers, MA) or glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH, Millipore), respectively, followed by incubation with appropriate horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse or anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, West Grove, PA). SuperSignal West Pico or Femto chemiluminescent substrate (Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used to elicit chemiluminescent signals that were visualized using ImageQuant LAS 4000 Imager (GE Healthcare Bio-Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA).
Pull down of strep-tagged proteins from infected cell lysate. A549 cells prepared in six 15-cm dishes (approximately 1.0 x 10 8 cells in total) were infected with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP at an MOI of 0.1. At 48 h pi, cells were washed three times with ice-cold PBS, scraped into fresh ice-cold PBS, and centrifuged at 400 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Supernatant was removed, and cells were lysed with 12 ml of PD lysis buffer (+) supplemented with halt protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktail (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and 5 μg/ml of deoxyribonuclease I (Worthington Biochemical Corporation, Lakewood, NJ). Lysate was clarified by centrifugation at 3,900 x g at 4˚C for 30 min to remove cell debris. Clarified cell lysate was then incubated with strep-tactin sepharose resin (QIAGEN) at 4˚C. After 2 h of incubation, the resin was washed three times with PD lysis buffer (+) and once with PD lysis buffer without TritonX-100 (PD lysis buffer [-] ). After the centrifugation at 1,600 x g and 4˚C for 5 min, the last wash buffer was removed, and protein complexes associated with the resin were eluted into 2 ml of PD lysis buffer (-) containing 2.5 mM of desthiobiotin. The eluate was then subjected to TCA precipitation followed by trypsin digestion.
Multidimensional protein identification technology microcolumn. A MudPIT microcolumn was prepared by first creating a Kasil frit at one end of an un-deactivated 250-μm outside diameter (OD) capillary tube (interior diameter of 360 μm)(Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA). The Kasil frit was prepared by briefly dipping a 20-30-cm capillary tube in 300 μl of Kasil 1624 potassium silicate well-mixed solution (PQ Corporation, Malvern, PA) and 100 μl of formamide, curing at 100˚C for 4 h, and cutting the frit to a length of %2 mm. Strong cation exchange particles (SCX Luna, 5-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) were packed in-house from particle slurries in methanol to 2.5 cm. Reversed phase particles (2 cm, C18 Aqua, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were then successively packed onto the capillary tube using the same method as SCX loading.
MudPIT analysis. An analytical reversed-phase liquid chromatography column was generated by pulling a 100-μm (interior diameter (ID) of 360 μm) OD capillary tube (Polymicro Technologies, Phoenix, AZ) to 5-μm ID tip. Reversed-phase particles (Luna C18, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were packed directly into the pulled column at 5.5 mPa until 15 cm long. The column was further packed, washed, and equilibrated at 10 mPa with buffer B (80% acetonitrile, 0.1% formic acid) followed by buffer A (5% acetonitrile and 0.1% formic acid). MudPIT and analytical columns were assembled using a zero-dead volume union (Upchurch Scientific, Oak Harbor, WA). LC-MS/MS analysis was performed with an Agilent high-pressure LC pump (Agilent) and linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap Orbitrap Velos (Thermo) using an in-house built electrospray stage. Electrospray was performed directly from the analytical column by applying the electrospray ionization (ESI) voltage at a tee (150 μm ID, Upchurch Scientific) directly downstream of a 1:1,000 split flow to reduce the flow rate to 300 nl/min through the columns. MudPIT experiments (10-step) were performed in which each step corresponds to 0, 10, 20, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 , and 100% buffer C (500 mM of ammonium acetate, 0.1% formic acid, and 5% acetonitrile) and was run for 3 min at the beginning of a 110-min gradient.
Data analysis. Protein and peptide identification were performed with Integrated Proteomics Pipeline-IP2 (Integrated Proteomics Applications, San Diego, CA. http://www. integratedproteomics.com/) using ProLuCID and DTASelect2 algorithms. DTASelect parameters were-p 2 -y 1-trypstat-pfp .01 -extra-pI-DB-dm-in. Spectrum raw files were extracted into ms2 files from raw files using open source RawExtract 1.9.9 (Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA; http://fields.scripps.edu/downloads.php), and the tandem mass spectra were searched against a human protein database (UniprotKB). To accurately estimate peptide probabilities and false discovery rates, we used a decoy database containing the reversed sequences of all the proteins appended to the target database. Tandem mass spectra were matched to sequences using the ProLuCID algorithm with a 600-ppm peptide mass tolerance. ProLuCID searches were done on an Intel Xeon cluster processor running under the Linux operating system. The search space included half and fully tryptic peptide candidates that fell within the mass tolerance window with no miscleavage constraint. Carbamidomethylation (+57.02146 Da) of cysteine was considered as a static modification. siRNA screening A549 cells (1,000 cells/well) in a 384-well plate were reverse transfected with 0.5 pmol of siRNA pool (S2 Table) targeting each gene using 0.1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (Thermo Fisher Scientific) (final siRNA concentration was 10 nM), followed by incubation at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 . At 72 h post-transfection, cells were infected (MOI = 0.05) with rLCMV/ZsG. siRNA target host-cell proteins were selected based on availability of validated siRNA sequences. The siRNAs we used to examine the effects on LCMV multiplication of knockdown expression of NP-interacting host cell protein candidate hits corresponded to the Genome-wide ON TAR-GET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene; Dharmacon, Lafayette, CO).
A549 cells (3.0 x 10 4 cells/well) were reverse transfected in a 24-well plate with 6 pmol of siRNA pools targeting each gene using 1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (final siRNA concentration is 10 nM). At 72 h post-transfection, total cell lysate was prepared in modified lysis A buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl [pH = 8.0], 50 mM NaCl, 1%Triton X-100, 1.25% sodium deoxycholate) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. The total protein concentration of clarified cell lysate was measured by Pierce BCA Protein Assay Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The same amount of protein from each sample was subjected to SDS-PAGE, and the protein expression of siRNA-targeted genes was analyzed by western blots.
Cells infected with eGFP-or ZsGreen-expressing rLCMV were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. After cell permeabilization by treatment with DB, cells were stained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). Green fluorescence (eGFP or ZsGreen) and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, Bio-Tek, Winooski, VT).
Mock-and virus-infected cells were fixed with 4% PFA. After cell permeabilization and blocking by treatment with DB containing 1% normal goat serum, cells were incubated with primary mouse anti ATP1A1 or PHB antibody followed by secondary anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluore 568 (anti-mouse IgG-AF568). Subsequently, cells were stained with VL-4-AF488. In some samples, primary antibody against ATP1A1 or PHB was omitted to determine background fluorescence. To visualize nuclei, DAPI Fluoromount-G (SouthernBiotech, Birmingham, AL) was used to mount coverslips on a slide glass. Stained cells were observed under a confocal microscope (LSM 710, Zeiss) and data analyzed by ZEN software (Zeiss). Co-localization analysis was performed on a pixel by pixel basis using Zen software (Zeiss). Eight green (NP-positive) cells were marked and every pixel in the marked area was plotted in the scatter diagram based on its intensity level from each channel. Thresholds for green and red channels were determined using mock-infected cells stained with VL-4-AF488 (anti-NP) and anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluor 568, without using anti-ATP1A1 or -PHB antibodies. Each pixel was assigned a value of 1. Co-localization coefficients (CC) (or non-weighted CC) were determined by dividing the sum of both green-and red-positive pixels by the sum of green positive pixels. This calculation was repeated for eight individual cells. To assess the specificity of co-localization, we determined weighted CC by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal. Comparison of non-weighted and weighted CC allowed us to determine whether brighter pixels were present in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions. p values were determined by a two-tailed paired t test using GraphPad Prism software.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 2 h, followed by infection with rLCMV/eGFP (MOI = 0.01). Compounds were present to study endpoint. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS, and eGFP expression was examined by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated and rLCMV/eGFP-infected cells were set to 100%. The IC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded in a 96-well plate (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions and cultured at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 48 h. Then, CellTiter 96 AQ ueous one solution reagent (Promega, Madison, WI) was added. Thereafter, the assay was performed according to the manufacturer's recommendations, and the absorbance (490 nm) was obtained using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) reader (SPECTRA max plus 384; Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated cells were set to 100%. The CC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A plasmid expressing C-terminus Strep-tagged Z protein (pC-LCMV-Z-Strep) was generated using similar procedure to generate a plasmid expressing C-terminus FLAG-tagged LASV Z protein (pC-LASV-Z-FLAG), and the budding assay was performed as previously described [88] . Cells (HEK 293T) in a 12-well plate were transfected with 0.5 μg of empty pCAGGS vector or pC-LCMV-Z-Strep or pC-LASV-Z-FLAG using Lipofectamine 2000. At 5 h post-transfection, media were replaced with fresh media and incubated at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 19 h. Then the cells were three times washed with fresh medium. After the removal of the last wash medium, cells were cultured in fresh medium containing ouabain (30 or 40 nM) or rocaglamide (50 or 100 nM) or equivalent concentration of DMSO, and 24 h later, virion-like particle (VLP)-containing TCS and cells were collected. Total cell lysate was prepared by lysing the cells with lysis buffer (1% NP-40, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 62.5 mM NaCl, 0.4% sodium deoxycholate). After clarification of TCS from cell debris by centrifugation at 400 x g and 4˚C for 10 min, VLPs were collected by ultracentrifugation at 100,000 x g and 4˚C for 30 min through a 20% sucrose cushion. VLPs were resuspended in PBS, and Z expression in total cell lysate and TCS (containing VLPs) were analyzed by western blots.
A549 cells infected with rLCMV/eGFP were harvested using Accutase cell detachment solution (Innovative Cell Technologies, San Diego, CA) and fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. eGFP expression was examined by flow cytometry using a BD LSR II (Becton Dickson), and data were analyzed with FlowJo (Tree Star, Inc., Ashland, OR).
293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected with scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were three times washed with fresh media to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of 40 nM of ouabain or vehicle control (DMSO). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayers of BHK-21 cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. Total cell lysate was prepared in cell lysis buffer (150 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% [NP-40], 1 mM of EDTA] and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. ZsGreen signal intensity in clarified cell lysate was measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek).
A549 cells seeded (2 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with combinations of different concentrations of ouabain and rocaglamide for 2 h and then infected (MOI = 0.01) with rLCMV/eGFP. Compounds were present in the culture medium throughout the experiment. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed, permeabilized by treatment with DB, and stained with DAPI. eGFP and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). eGFP readouts were normalized by DAPI readouts, and normalized data were used to analyze synergistic effect of the two compounds by the MacSynergy II program [89] .
Data were analyzed for p values by a two-tailed unpaired t test using GraphPad Prism software. | What method can significantly alleviate the emergence of drug-resistant variants in RNA viral infections? | 5,157 | Combination therapy | 20,355 |
1,687 | Interactome analysis of the lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus nucleoprotein in infected cells reveals ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit Alpha 1 and prohibitin as host-cell factors involved in the life cycle of mammarenaviruses
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834214/
SHA: efbd0dfc426da5dd25ce29411d6fa37571623773
Authors: Iwasaki, Masaharu; Minder, Petra; Caì, Yíngyún; Kuhn, Jens H.; Yates, John R.; Torbett, Bruce E.; de la Torre, Juan C.
Date: 2018-02-20
DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892
License: cc0
Abstract: Several mammalian arenaviruses (mammarenaviruses) cause hemorrhagic fevers in humans and pose serious public health concerns in their endemic regions. Additionally, mounting evidence indicates that the worldwide-distributed, prototypic mammarenavirus, lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance. Concerns about human-pathogenic mammarenaviruses are exacerbated by of the lack of licensed vaccines, and current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to off-label use of ribavirin that is only partially effective. Detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions may facilitate the development of novel anti-mammarenavirus strategies by targeting components of the host-cell machinery that are required for efficient virus multiplication. Here we document the generation of a recombinant LCMV encoding a nucleoprotein (NP) containing an affinity tag (rLCMV/Strep-NP) and its use to capture the NP-interactome in infected cells. Our proteomic approach combined with genetics and pharmacological validation assays identified ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit alpha 1 (ATP1A1) and prohibitin (PHB) as pro-viral factors. Cell-based assays revealed that ATP1A1 and PHB are involved in different steps of the virus life cycle. Accordingly, we observed a synergistic inhibitory effect on LCMV multiplication with a combination of ATP1A1 and PHB inhibitors. We show that ATP1A1 inhibitors suppress multiplication of Lassa virus and Candid#1, a live-attenuated vaccine strain of Junín virus, suggesting that the requirement of ATP1A1 in virus multiplication is conserved among genetically distantly related mammarenaviruses. Our findings suggest that clinically approved inhibitors of ATP1A1, like digoxin, could be repurposed to treat infections by mammarenaviruses pathogenic for humans.
Text: Introduction Mammarenaviruses (Arenaviridae: Mammarenavirus) cause chronic infections of rodents worldwide [1] . Invasion of human dwellings by infected rodents can result in human infections through mucosal exposure to aerosols or by direct contact of abraded skin with infectious material. Several mammarenaviruses cause viral hemorrhagic fevers (VHFs) in humans and pose important public health problems in their endemic areas [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] . Mammarenaviruses are classified into two main groups, Old World (OW) and New World (NW) [1] . The OW Lassa virus (LASV), causative agent of Lassa fever (LF), is the most significant OW mammarenaviral pathogen. LASV is estimated to infect several hundred thousand individuals annually in Western Africa, resulting in a high number of LF cases associated with high morbidity and lethality. Moreover, LASV endemic regions are expanding [7] , and the association of the recently identified mammarenavirus Lujo virus with a VHF outbreak in Southern Africa [8, 9] has raised concerns about the emergence of novel VHF-causing mammarenaviruses. The most significant NW mammarenavirus is Junín virus (JUNV), which causes Argentinian hemorrhagic fever [10] . The worldwide-distributed OW mammarenavirus lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance especially in congenital infections [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] . Moreover, LCMV poses a particular threat to immunocompromised individuals, as has been illustrated by fatal cases of LCMV infection associated with organ transplants [16, 17] . However, LCMV research can be safely performed at BSL-2 containment, rather than the BSL-4 containment necessary for live LASV or JUNV research [18] .
No US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-licensed vaccines are available for the treatment of arenavirus infections, although a live attenuated vaccine strain of JUNV, Candid#1, is licensed in Argentina. Likewise, current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to an offlabel use of the nucleoside analogue ribavirin that is only partially effective and can cause significant side effects [19] [20] [21] . Development of effective anti-mammarenavirus drugs has been hampered by the lack of detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions required for mammarenavirus multiplication that could represent amenable targets for antiviral therapy. the potential problem that overexpression of a single viral gene product may potentiate PPI interactions that are not relevant during the course of a natural virus infection. To overcome this issue, we designed a recombinant LCMV (rLCMV) encoding a tandem [WSHPQFEK (GGGS) 3 WSHPQFEK] Strep-tag fused to the amino-terminus of NP (rLCMV/Strep-NP) (Fig 1A and 1B) . To facilitate the identification of specific PPI between NP and host cell proteins, we used our mammarenavirus tri-segmented (r3) platform [30] to design an r3LCMV expressing a C-terminus Strep-tag version of enhanced green fluorescent protein (r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep) that we used as a negative control (Fig 1A and 1B) . We rescued rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep and confirmed the expression of strep-tagged NP and eGFP in rLCMV/ Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, respectively (Fig 1C) . Next, we examined the growth properties of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep in three different cells lines from hamsters, humans, and nonhuman primates (BHK-21, A549, and Vero E6 cells, respectively) (Fig 1D) . The fitness of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep was modestly decreased compared to that observed with wild-type (WT) Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and Clone 13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains of LCMV. However, both rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep had WT-like growth kinetics and reached high titers. As with WT LCMV, infection with rLCMV/Strep-NP prevented production of bioactive IFN-I by cells in response to Sendai virus (SeV) infection as determined using an IFN bioassay based on protection against the cytopathic effect (CPE) induced by infection with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) (Fig 1E) . Vero cells treated for 16 h with tissue cultured supernatants (TCS) from A549 cells infected first with WT LCMV or rLCMV/Strep, followed by 24 h infection with SeV, remained fully susceptible to VSV-induced CPE. In contrast, Vero cells treated with TCS from A549 cells infected with rLCMV/NP(D382A), a mutant unable to prevent induction of IFN-I [30] , and subsequently with SeV, were protected against VSV induced CPE.
We selected the human A549 cell line because lung epithelial cells are one of the initial cell targets of humans following inhalation of mammarenavirions. We infected A549 cells (multiplicity of infection [MOI] = 0.1) with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep (Fig 2A) . At 48 h post-inoculation (pi), we prepared total cell lysates for pull-down (PD) assays using a sepharose resin coated with strep-tactin. Aliquots of the protein complexes present in the PD samples were fractionated by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) (Fig 2B) followed by SYPRO Ruby protein gel staining. We compared the pattern of stained protein bands detected between rLCMV/Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strepinfected samples and confirmed the presence of Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep in pertinent samples (Fig 2B) . Protein complexes in the rest of eluates from the PD samples were concentrated by trichloroacetic acid (TCA) precipitation and subjected to trypsin digestion (Fig 2A) . Digested peptides were subjected to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) analysis using a hybrid mass spectrometer consisting of linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap (LTQ) Velos and an Orbitrap analyser.
We classified host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS analysis from two independent biological replicates into two groups: 1) proteins found only in Strep-NP PD samples with at least five spectral counts ( Table 1) , and 2) proteins found in both Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep PD samples with five or higher spectral counts in Strep-NP samples and at least 2-fold higher spectral counts in Strep-NP PD compared to eGFP PD samples ( Table 2) . Filtering the data using these criteria resulted in identification of 139 candidate host-cell proteins as NP-interacting partners. Among 53 proteins found present in both NP-and eGFP-PD samples, 36 had spectral counts in the NP-PD sample that were less than two-fold higher than their corresponding spectral counts in the eGFP-PD sample (Fig 2C and S1 Table) . Based on the criteria we described above, we considered these proteins to be highly unlikely specific NPinteractors with an involvement in the LCMV life cycle, and therefore we did not consider these hits for further analysis. However, we acknowledge that we cannot formally rule out that some of these hits could still play a role on the life cycle of LCMV.
The protein annotation through evolutionary relationship (PANTHER) protein family classification (Biological Process) of the NP-interacting protein candidates revealed that a large number of proteins were involved in metabolic and cellular processes (Fig 2D) . We also analyzed the molecular functions of the NP-interacting protein candidates according to the PAN-THER protein profile classification (Fig 2E) , which revealed diversified biochemical functions enriched for nucleic acid-binding proteins and chaperones.
To initially assess pro-or anti-viral roles of NP-interacting host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS, we examined the effect of small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated knockdown (kd) of each of the corresponding genes on multiplication of rLCMV expressing reporter gene ZsGreen (ZsG) in A549 cells (Fig 3A) . The siRNAs we used were from the genome-wide ON TARGET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene). OTPs are latest generation of siRNAs and offer significant advantages over previous generations. Off-target effects are primarily driven by antisense strand microRNA (miR)-like seed activity. In OTPs, the sense strand is modified to favor antisense strand uptake whereas the antisense strand seed region is modified to drastically reduce seed-related off-targeting [33] . In addition, OTPs are designed on the foundation of the SMARTselection algorithm (Dharmacon), widely considered to be the best algorithm for rational siRNA design strategy. Numerous host-cell factors showed an anti-LCMV effect (increased ZsG expression by kd of the genes), including microtubule-associated protein 1B (MAP1B) [ [38] , dengue virus 2 (DENV-2) [39] , and chikungunya virus (CHIKV) [40] .
To begin assessing the potential biological implications of the identified NP-host cell protein interactions, we selected ATP1A1 and PHB given the availability of reagents, existing knowledge about their roles in cell physiology, and evidence of participation in multiplication of other viruses. We confirmed that cells transfected with siRNA specific to ATP1A1 and PHB exhibited the predicted reduced levels in ATP1A1 and PHB protein expression (Fig 3B) . Likewise, we examined whether siRNA-mediated reduced expression levels of ZsGreen correlated with reduced LCMV progeny titers. For this, we transfected A549 cells with siRNA targeting Expression of Strep-tagged proteins. A549 cells seeded (5.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 6-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMVs. At 48 h pi, total cell lysates were prepared, and protein expression was analyzed by western blotting. (D) Growth properties of rLCMV expressing Strep-tagged proteins. BHK-21 (1.75 x 10 5 cells/well), A549 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well), or Vero E6 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well) cells seeded in 24-well plates and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.01) with the indicated rLCMVs. At the indicated times pi, TCSs were collected and virus titers determined by IFFA. Results represent means ± SD of the results of three independent experiments. (E) Lack of induction of IFN-I in cells infected with rLCMV/Strep-NP. A549 cells were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMV or mock-infected, and 36 h later infected with SeV (MOI = 1). At 24 h pi with SeV, TCS were collected and used, following virus inactivation by U.V., to treat Vero E6 cells for 16 h, followed by infection with rVSV (MOI = 0.1) [rVSV(+)] or mockinfection [rVSV (-) ]. At 24 h pi with rVSV, cells were fixed with 4% PFA and stained with crystal violet to assess rVSV-induced cytopathic effect. We used as control rLCMV/NP(D382A) that contains mutation D382A within NP, which has been shown to abrogate the NP's ability to counteract the induction of IFN-I production.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892.g001 ATP1A1 or with NC siRNA 72 h prior to infection with rLCMV/ZsG. We found that siRNAmediated kd of ATP1A1 dramatically inhibited ZsGreen expression (Fig 3Ci) , which was associated with a significant reduction of infectious LCMV progeny (Fig 3Cii) . Our attempts to see interaction between NP and ATP1A1 or NP and PHB by co-immunoprecipitation were unsuccessful. Several possibilities could account for this, including interactions of low affinity or high on/off rate or both. Another consideration is that only a minor fraction of NP might be engaged in the interaction with a given host cell protein, and therefore, detection of these interactions would require highly sensitive methods such as LC-MS/MS. To overcome this problem we used confocal microscopy to examine the co-localization of NP with ATP1A1 and PHB in LCMV-infected cells. Weighted co-localization coefficients (CC), determined by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal, were significantly higher than non-weighted CC, indicating the presence of brighter pixels in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions (Fig 4) .
The cardiac glycoside ouabain is an inhibitor of ATP1A1 that has been used to treat congestive heart failure in European countries [41] . The PHB inhibitor rocaglamide is a flavagline from an Aglaia tree used in traditional Chinese medicine [42] that has potent anticancer activity [43] . To examine whether pharmacological inhibition of ATP1A1 or PHB inhibited LCMV multiplication, we pretreated human (A549 and HEK 293T), nonhuman primate (Vero E6), and rodent (murine L929 and hamster BHK-21) cells with ouabain or rocaglamide and infected them with rLCMV/eGFP (S1 Fig). Ouabain treatment resulted in a strong dosedependent inhibition of eGFP expression in infected human-and nonhuman primate cells, but did not affect eGFP expression intensity in infected rodent cells (S1A Fig) . This finding is consistent with rodents expressing an ATP1A1 allele that is resistant to ouabain inhibition [44] .
Likewise, we observed a dose-dependent rocaglamide inhibition of eGFP expression in all cell lines infected with rLCMV/eGFP (S1B Fig) . Consistent with these findings, production of infectious LCMV progeny was reduced by treatment with either ouabain or rocaglamide ( Fig 5A) within a concentration range that had minimal impact on cell viability (Fig 5B) . To examine the correlation between efficacy and cytotoxicity of these compounds, we determined their therapeutic index (TI = CC 50 /IC 50 (Fig 5Bi) ; whereas rocaglamide had TIs of >105 (CC 50 > 1000 nM, IC 50 = 9.51 nM) and 10.3 (CC 50 = 100 nM, IC 50 = 9.75 nM) in A549 and Vero E6 cells, respectively (Fig 5Bii) . Moreover, the ATP1A1 antagonist inhibitor, bufalin, also exhibited robust anti-LCMV activity with TIs of 8.92 (CC 50 Heat shock protein HSP 90-alpha HSP90AA1 P07900 8 10 9
Endoplasmin HSP90B1 P14625 9 9 9
Large neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1 SLC7A5 Q01650 6 12 9
Keratin, type II cuticular Hb1 KRT81 Q14533 10 8 9
Putative helicase MOV-10 MOV10 Q9HCE1 8 10 9
Microtubule-associated protein 1B MAP1B P46821 6 11 8.5
Spectrin beta chain, rocaglamide (100 nM) (Fig 5C) , further supporting a specific anti-LCMV activity of ouabain and rocaglamide that was not due to reduced cell viability.
To gain insights about the mechanisms by which ouabain and rocaglamide exert their anti-LCMV activity, we examined effects of these compounds on distinct steps of the LCMV life cycle. First, we asked whether ouabain and rocaglamide affected cell entry of LCMV. We conducted time-of-addition experiments in which we treated cells with ouabain or rocaglamide prior to virus inoculation (-1.5 h), at the time of inoculation (0 h), or 1.5 h pi (+1.5 h) (Fig 6A) .
In some samples, we used ammonium chloride starting at 4 h pi to block multiple rounds of virus infection. The timing of compound addition did not significantly change the number of eGFP-positive cells, indicating that neither ouabain nor rocaglamide inhibited cell entry of LCMV. The number of eGFP + cells in ouabain-treated cells was reduced at all time-of-addition points compared to vehicle dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-treated cells, but was similar to that observed in ammonium chloride-treated cells. Thus, ouabain did not inhibit LCMV RNA replication and gene expression, but rather a late step of the LCMV life cycle. In contrast, rocaglamide treatment resulted in a negligible number of eGFP + cells, indicating that rocaglamide inhibited virus RNA replication and gene transcription.
To further investigate the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis, we infected A549 cells with a recombinant single-cycle infectious LCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) and treated cells with either ouabain or rocaglamide. Seventy-two hours later, we determined percent normalized eGFP expression in infected cells (Fig 6B) . Consistent with our results from the time-of-addition experiment, ouabain did not affect reporter eGFP expression. However, rocaglamide reduced eGFP expression, confirming inhibitory effect of rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis.
We also examined the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on the late step of the arenavirus life cycle, Z-mediated budding. For this experiment, we transfected cells with Z-Strep-and Z-FLAG (DYKDDDDK epitope)-expressing plasmids from LCMV and LASV, respectively. At 24 h post-transfection, we removed the tissue culture supernatant (TCS) and washed extensively transfected cells to eliminate already budded Z. We cultured the transfected cells in the presence or absence of ouabain or rocaglamide. At 24 h, we determined by WB levels of Z protein in both whole cell lysates and associated with virus-like particles (VLPs) collected from TCS. Treatment with rocaglamide, but not with ouabain, caused a reduction in both LCMV and LASV Z budding efficiency (Fig 6C and 6D) . The reproducibility of these findings was confirmed based on results from four independent experiments (Fig 6E) . We also examined whether ouabain could interfere with a step of assembly of infectious progeny that was not captured by the Z budding assay through two additional experiments. The first experiment involved the use of a newly generated single-cycle infectious recombinant LCMV expressing the reporter gene ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP) to infect (MOI = 0.1) A549 cells (1 st infection). These cells were subsequently transfected with a plasmid expressing LCMV GPC. After 24 h, we used TCS to infect a fresh cell monolayer (2 nd infection) and identified infected cells based on ZsGreen expression. To assess the effect of ouabain on de novo assembly of infectious progeny we determined normalized ratios (2 nd /1 st infection) of ZsGreen + cells (Fig 6F) . The second experiment involved infection (MOI = 0.1) of cells with WT LCMV, and 48 h later we washed infected cells three times to remove the extracellular infectious progeny produced during the first 48 h of infection. Then, fresh media containing ouabain or DMSO vehicle control were added, and 24 h later we determined virus titers in TCS (Fig 6G) . Results from both experiments consistently showed that ouabain did not inhibit assembly de novo of extracellular infectious virus.
Combination therapy can significantly alleviate the problem posed by the rapid emergence of drug-resistant variants commonly observed during monotherapy strategies to control RNA virus infections. Since ouabain and rocaglamide inhibited different steps of the LCMV life cycle, we examined whether their use in combination results in a synergistic anti-LCMV effect. For this experiment, we infected A549 cells with rLCMV/eGFP and treated them with ouabain and rocaglamide using different concentrations and combinations. At 48 h pi, we determined percent eGFP expression (Fig 7) . Combination treatment with ouabain and rocaglamide resulted in synergistic anti-LCMV activity that was enhanced under conditions using higher concentrations of ouabain and lower concentrations of rocaglamide.
We next asked whether the ATP1A1 and PHB host-cell factors contributed also to multiplication of viral hemorrhagic fever-causing LASV. We treated A549 cells with ouabain, bufalin, or rocaglamide and inoculated the treated cells with recombinant LASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP). eGFP expression was examined 48 h later. Similar to rLCMV infection, LASV multiplication was restricted in ouabain-, bufalin-, or rocaglamide-treated cells at concentrations minimally impacting cell viability, although their IC 50 values were slightly higher than those found with the LCMV infection system (Fig 5B and S2 Fig) as ouabain had IC 50 of 9.34 nM, bufalin had IC 50 of 1.66 nM and rocaglamide had IC 50 of 37.0 nM (Fig 8) . We also tested the effect of compounds targeting ATP1A1 and PHB on multiplication of JUNV. Consistent with our results obtained with LCMV and LASV, ouabain, bufalin, and rocaglamide strongly suppressed JUNV multiplication (S3 Fig). These findings indicate that ATP1A1 and PHB function as pro-viral factors of a range of mammarenaviruses.
We identified ATP1A1 and PHB as novel host-cell proteins that contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses. Our approach using a recombinant LCMV expressing NP with an affinity tag facilitated defining the NP interactome in the context of LCMV infection. Recently, using an NP-specific monoclonal antibody (mAb) to precipitate NP and associated cellular protein partners in a mammarenavirus NP interactome, King et al. identified 348 host proteins that associated with LCMV NP [45] . We found 99 common proteins between our filtered LCMV NP interactome of 171 proteins and the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. Differences in both experimental conditions and analysis methodologies used to generate the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. and ours likely h post-transfection, cells were washed with fresh media to eliminate Z-mediated production of VLPs in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain or Roc-A at the indicated concentrations. VLPs present in TCS were collected by ultracentrifugation, and cell lysates were prepared. Z protein expression in VLPs and cell lysates were determined by western blots using antibodies to Strep-tag (C) and FLAG-tag (D). Budding efficiency for each sample was estimated by dividing the signal intensity of the Z protein associated with VLPs by that of Z detected in the cell lysate. Numbers on the bottom of panel C correspond to LCMV Z budding efficiencies determined in a representative experiment. Results shown in panel E correspond to the average and SD from four independent experiments including the one shown in panel D. The mean budding efficiency of DMSO treatedsamples was set to 100%. Data represent mean ± SD of four independent experiments. (F) Effect of ouabain on incorporation of viral glycoprotein into virions. 293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with scrLCMV/ZsG (1 st infection) for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were washed with fresh medium to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain at 40 nM (OUA). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayer of BHK-21 cells (2 nd infection) seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. ZsGreen signal intensity was measured by a fluorescent plate reader. GP-incorporation efficiency was estimated by dividing ZsGreen signal intensity in BHK-21 cell lysate (2 nd ) by that in 293T cell lysate (1 st ). The mean GP-incorporation efficiency of DMSO treated samples was set to 100%. Data represent means ± SD from three independent experiments. contributed to the observed differences between data sets. Despite progress in the implementation of global proteomics-based screens to identify virus-host protein-protein interactions, overlap between datasets for the same viral system is usually limited. However, the substantial overlap of 99 of the 171 NP-interacting proteins from both studies supports the overall reliability of both systems. We used results of the eGFP-Strep interactome, determined in r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, as a control to filter out non-specific NP interactions, which may have resulted in a higher degree of stringency than in the study by King et al for selection of NP-interacting candidates. The combined information provided by the NP interactome reported by King et al. and the one we present in this work, will facilitate future studies to further characterize the functional and biological implications of NP-host cell interacting proteins.
All tested mammarenavirus NPs, with exception of the NP from TCRV, blocked IRF-3-dependent IFN-I induction [25, 46] . The anti-IFN activity of NP was mapped to its C-terminal part and linked to the 3'-5' exonuclease domain present with the NP C-terminal part [30] . Inhibitor-B kinase ε (IKKε) was identified as an NP-binding protein using plasmid-mediated overexpression in transfected cells [47] , and the NP-IKKε binding affinity correlated with NP's ability to inhibit IFN-I induction [47] . We, as well as the work by King et al. [45] , did not detect this NP-IKKε interaction. This discrepancy may have been caused by very low expression of IKKε in LCMV-infected cells, which prevented detection of IKKε by LC-MS/MS. Alternatively, NP-IKKε interaction could possibility be temporarily regulated and take place at early times pi, but could be mostly absent at 48 h pi, the time at which we prepared the cell lysates for our proteomics studies. Future studies comparing the NP interactome at different times during infection will contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics of NP/hostcell protein interactions.
Na + /K + -ATPase is a well-characterized membrane ion transporter and is composed of two functional subunits (α and β) and one regulatory γ subunit [48] . ATP1A1 represents one of four α subunits [49, 50] . Recent evidence has suggested that the Na + /K + -ATPase is involved in multiple cell signaling pathways that are independent of its ion-pumping function [51] . Cardiac glycoside inhibitors of the Na + /K + -ATPase (NKA), so-called cardiotonic steroids (CST; e.g., ouabain, bufalin), have been shown to inhibit multiplication of different viruses including Ebola virus [35], coronaviruses [36], herpes simplex virus 1 [52, 53] , CHIKV [54] , human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) [55] , adenovirus [56] and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 1 [57] .
Different mechanisms are likely to contribute to the antiviral activity of CSTs, including altered cell functions modulated by the signaling activity of Na + /K + -ATPase [58] . Thus, a low concentration of ouabain induces a conformational change in ATP1A1 that results in activation and release of proto-oncogene tyrosine protein kinase, Src, from ATP1A1, followed by activation of as yet unknown downstream signaling that inhibits, for instance, cell entry of murine hepatitis virus (MHV) [59] . However, our results indicated that ouabain did not interfere with LCMV cell entry. In addition, treatment with the Src inhibitor 4-amino-5-(4-methylphenyl)-7-(t-butyl)pyrazolo [3,4-d] pyrimidine (PP1) did not counteract the anti-LCMV activity of ouabain (S4 Fig). Nevertheless, ATP1A1-mediated Src signaling could plausibly contribute to the inhibitory effect of ouabain on JUNV multiplication as similarly to that observed with MHV. Moreover, cell entry of JUNV occurs also by clathrin-mediated endocytosis [60] , a process affected by Src signaling. Ouabain has been clinically used in several European countries for the management of congestive heart failure, whereas bufalin has been tested in clinical trials for cancer treatments [61] , and the CST digoxin has been FDA-approved since 1997 to treat heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Hence, opportunities for the repurposing CSTs have potential as therapeutics to treat infections caused by viral hemorrhagic fever-causing arenaviruses.
The PHB inhibitor, rocaglamide, appeared to interfere with LCMV RNA synthesis and budding, but did not affect LCMV cell entry. In contrast, PHB was reported to be a cell entry receptor for DENV-2 [39] and CHIKV [40] . On the other hand, PHB did not act as a virus cell entry receptor for HCV. Rather, PHB contributed to HCV cell entry through binding to cellular RAF (c-Raf; proto-oncogene serine/threonine-protein kinase) and subsequent Harvey rat sarcoma proto-oncogene (HRas) activation that induces a signal transduction pathway required for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mediated HCV cell entry [37] . In addition, siRNA-mediated kd of PHB decreased production of H5N1 FLUAV [38] . These findings indicate that PHB is involved in different steps of the life cycle of a variety of viruses, and thereby an attractive target for the development of broad-spectrum antiviral drugs.
Rocaglate is a group of natural compounds, which includes rocaglamide, that inhibits protein synthesis by targeting the ATP-dependent DEAD-box RNA helicase eukaryotic initiation factor 4A (eIF4A) and exerts anti-tumor activity [62, 63] . The rocaglate compound, silvestrol, inhibits Ebola virus multiplication likely by interfering with the role of eIF4A in viral protein translation [64] .
While we focused on two host proteins, ATP1A1 and PHB, in this study, our proteomics approach also identified several NP-interacting host-cell proteins whose kd expression via siRNA resulted in increased LCMV multiplication. These proteins, which included MAP1B, might have anti-LCMV activity. MAP1B has been shown to bind to nonstructural proteins 1 (NS1) and 2 (NS2) of human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) [34] . NS1 and NS2 of HRSV antagonizes host IFN-I response by reducing the levels of TNF receptor associated factor (TRAF3), IKKε (NS1), and STAT2 (NS2) [65] . NS2-MAP1B interaction interfered with HRSV NS2's ability to reduce levels of STAT2, whereas the role of NS1-MAP1B interaction remains to be determined [34] . Examining the role of NP-MAP1B interaction in modulating NP's ability to inhibit induction of type I IFN is of interest.
We identified among the NP-interacting host cell proteins the RNA helicase Moloney leukemia virus 10 (MOV10), which has been reported to be an antiviral factor for FLUAV [66] , retroviruses [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] , and DENV-2 [72] . We did not observe increased LCMV multiplication in cells subjected to siRNA-mediated kd of MOV10, a finding that would question an anti-LCMV activity of MOV10. However, we consider that LCMV has already optimal multiplication in A549 cells and further increases may occur only under rather unique conditions. MOV10 was shown to enhance IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction following SeV infection through a tank binding kinase 1 (TBK1)-independent and IKKε-dependent manner. This finding was further supported by demonstrating MOV10-IKKε interaction by co-immunoprecipitation studies [73] . We documented that the anti-IFN activity of mammarenavirus NP correlated with its ability to interact with IKKε [47] . Whether NP-MOV10 interaction prevents MOV10 from enhancing IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction remains to be determined.
Several members of the mammalian chaperonin-containing T-complex (CCT) were identified as prominent hits in our NP interactome. The mammalian CCT is critical for folding of many proteins with important functions in diverse cellular processes [74] , and may protect complex protein topologies within its central cavity during biosynthesis and folding [75] . The contribution of CCT members to NP assembly into a nucleocapsid structure could account for their presence in the NP, but not eGFP, interactome. Interestingly, members of the CCT have been implicated in multiplication of different viruses including rabies virus [76, 77] , HCV [78] and FLUAV [79] . However, the role of these CCT proteins in virus multiplication remains unknown and may involve functions other than acting as molecular chaperones.
Previous studies documented the presence of several components of the of eIF4F, including 4A, within viral replication-transcription complexes (RTC) detected in cells infected with LCMV [80] and TCRV [81] . These findings, together with the detection of a number of ribosomal proteins in the NP interactome, suggest that translation of viral mRNAs may take place within RTC. However, rocaglamide interference with the activity of eIF4A within the viral RTC might contribute to its anti-LCMV activity.
In this work, we documented the generation of rLCMV/Strep-NP and its use to define the NP-interactome in infected cells. We presented evidence that ATP1A1 and PHB contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses using genetics and pharmacological inhibition of the genes. Consistent with our findings, bioinformatic analysis revealed that the protein network associated with ATP1A1 and PHB involves host cell proteins with functions in biological processes that have been implicated in virus multiplication (S5 Fig). The overall experimental approach described here can facilitate the identification of biologically relevant NP-interacting host-cell proteins. Future studies elucidating the roles of pro-and antiviral host-cell factors identified in this study in mammarenavirus multiplication will advance our understanding of the multiple functions of NP and uncover novel cellular targets for the development of antimammarenaviral drugs. In addition, by identifying proviral host-cell factors, drugs that are already approved can be repurposing as therapeutics to combat human pathogenic mammarenavirus infections.
Baby hamster kidney BHK-21 (American Type Culture Collection, ATCC, CCL-10), house mouse L929 (ATCC CCL-1), grivet Vero E6 (ATCC CRL-1586), human A549 (ATCC CCL-185), and human HEK 293T (ATCC CRL-3216) cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) containing 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, 2 mM of L-glutamine, 100 mg/ml of streptomycin, and 100 U/ml of penicillin at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 .
WT recombinant LCMVs, Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and clone-13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains, were generated as described [30, 82, 83] . Generation of rLCMV/NP(D382A) and SeV, strain Cantell, was described [30, 82, 83 ]. An rLCMV lacking GPC and expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) was generated by reverse genetics using procedures previously described [84] . rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep were generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate WT rLCMV and tri-segmented LCMV (r3LCMV) expressing eGFP [30] . For the generation of these novel rLCMVs, we created pol1S Cl-13 plasmids that directed Pol1-mediated intracellular synthesis of recombinant LCMV S genome RNA species coding for Strep-tagged NP or eGFP, respectively (Fig 1A and 1B) . The rLCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMV/eGFP) was generated as described [85] , and the rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (rLCMV/ZsG) instead of eGFP was generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMV/eGFP. Generation of rLASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP) will be described elsewhere. A tri-segmented recombinant live-attenuated Candid #1 strain of JUNV expressing eGFP (r3JUNV/eGFP) was generated as described [86] . For the generation of a novel single cycle rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP), a pol1S plasmid was created by omitting GPC open reading frame (ORF) from pol1S plasmid used for the generation of rLCMV/ZsG. scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP was rescued by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP [84] .
LCMV titers were determined by immunofocus forming assay (IFFA) as described [87] . Briefly, 10-fold serial virus dilutions were used to infect Vero E6 cell monolayers in a 96-well plate, and at 20 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). After cell permeabilization by treatment with dilution buffer (DB) (0.3% Triton X-100 in PBS-containing 3% bovine serum albumin [BSA]), cells were stained with a rat mAb to NP (VL-4, Bio X Cell, West Lebanon, NH) conjugated with Alexa Fluor 488 (VL-4-AF488, Protein Labeling Kit, Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA). VSV titers were determined by a plaque assay.
Total cell lysates were prepared in PD lysis buffer (+) (250 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% TritonX-100, 10% glycerol, 1 mM of MgCl 2 , 1 μM of CaCl 2 , 1 μM of ZnCl 2 ) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Clarified lysates were mixed at a 1:1 ratio with loading buffer (100 mM of Tris [pH 6.8], 20% 2-mercaptoethanol, 4% SDS, 0.2% bromophenol blue, 20% glycerol) and boiled for 5 min. Proteins samples were fractionated by SDS-PAGE using 4-20% gradient polyacrylamide gels (Mini-PROTEAN TGX gels 4-20%, Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA), and proteins were transferred by electroblotting onto polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Immobilin Transfer Membranes, Millipore, Billerica, MA). To detect Strep-tagged proteins, membranes were reacted with mouse monoclonal antibodies to Strep (QIAGEN, Germantown, MD), eGFP (Takara Bio USA, Mountain View, CA), GP 2 (We33/ 36), ATP1A1 (TehrmoFisher Scientific, Rockford, IL), PHB (Abcam, Cambridge, MA) or rabbit polyclonal antibodies to α-tubulin (Cell Signaling Technologies, Danvers, MA) or glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH, Millipore), respectively, followed by incubation with appropriate horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse or anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, West Grove, PA). SuperSignal West Pico or Femto chemiluminescent substrate (Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used to elicit chemiluminescent signals that were visualized using ImageQuant LAS 4000 Imager (GE Healthcare Bio-Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA).
Pull down of strep-tagged proteins from infected cell lysate. A549 cells prepared in six 15-cm dishes (approximately 1.0 x 10 8 cells in total) were infected with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP at an MOI of 0.1. At 48 h pi, cells were washed three times with ice-cold PBS, scraped into fresh ice-cold PBS, and centrifuged at 400 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Supernatant was removed, and cells were lysed with 12 ml of PD lysis buffer (+) supplemented with halt protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktail (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and 5 μg/ml of deoxyribonuclease I (Worthington Biochemical Corporation, Lakewood, NJ). Lysate was clarified by centrifugation at 3,900 x g at 4˚C for 30 min to remove cell debris. Clarified cell lysate was then incubated with strep-tactin sepharose resin (QIAGEN) at 4˚C. After 2 h of incubation, the resin was washed three times with PD lysis buffer (+) and once with PD lysis buffer without TritonX-100 (PD lysis buffer [-] ). After the centrifugation at 1,600 x g and 4˚C for 5 min, the last wash buffer was removed, and protein complexes associated with the resin were eluted into 2 ml of PD lysis buffer (-) containing 2.5 mM of desthiobiotin. The eluate was then subjected to TCA precipitation followed by trypsin digestion.
Multidimensional protein identification technology microcolumn. A MudPIT microcolumn was prepared by first creating a Kasil frit at one end of an un-deactivated 250-μm outside diameter (OD) capillary tube (interior diameter of 360 μm)(Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA). The Kasil frit was prepared by briefly dipping a 20-30-cm capillary tube in 300 μl of Kasil 1624 potassium silicate well-mixed solution (PQ Corporation, Malvern, PA) and 100 μl of formamide, curing at 100˚C for 4 h, and cutting the frit to a length of %2 mm. Strong cation exchange particles (SCX Luna, 5-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) were packed in-house from particle slurries in methanol to 2.5 cm. Reversed phase particles (2 cm, C18 Aqua, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were then successively packed onto the capillary tube using the same method as SCX loading.
MudPIT analysis. An analytical reversed-phase liquid chromatography column was generated by pulling a 100-μm (interior diameter (ID) of 360 μm) OD capillary tube (Polymicro Technologies, Phoenix, AZ) to 5-μm ID tip. Reversed-phase particles (Luna C18, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were packed directly into the pulled column at 5.5 mPa until 15 cm long. The column was further packed, washed, and equilibrated at 10 mPa with buffer B (80% acetonitrile, 0.1% formic acid) followed by buffer A (5% acetonitrile and 0.1% formic acid). MudPIT and analytical columns were assembled using a zero-dead volume union (Upchurch Scientific, Oak Harbor, WA). LC-MS/MS analysis was performed with an Agilent high-pressure LC pump (Agilent) and linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap Orbitrap Velos (Thermo) using an in-house built electrospray stage. Electrospray was performed directly from the analytical column by applying the electrospray ionization (ESI) voltage at a tee (150 μm ID, Upchurch Scientific) directly downstream of a 1:1,000 split flow to reduce the flow rate to 300 nl/min through the columns. MudPIT experiments (10-step) were performed in which each step corresponds to 0, 10, 20, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 , and 100% buffer C (500 mM of ammonium acetate, 0.1% formic acid, and 5% acetonitrile) and was run for 3 min at the beginning of a 110-min gradient.
Data analysis. Protein and peptide identification were performed with Integrated Proteomics Pipeline-IP2 (Integrated Proteomics Applications, San Diego, CA. http://www. integratedproteomics.com/) using ProLuCID and DTASelect2 algorithms. DTASelect parameters were-p 2 -y 1-trypstat-pfp .01 -extra-pI-DB-dm-in. Spectrum raw files were extracted into ms2 files from raw files using open source RawExtract 1.9.9 (Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA; http://fields.scripps.edu/downloads.php), and the tandem mass spectra were searched against a human protein database (UniprotKB). To accurately estimate peptide probabilities and false discovery rates, we used a decoy database containing the reversed sequences of all the proteins appended to the target database. Tandem mass spectra were matched to sequences using the ProLuCID algorithm with a 600-ppm peptide mass tolerance. ProLuCID searches were done on an Intel Xeon cluster processor running under the Linux operating system. The search space included half and fully tryptic peptide candidates that fell within the mass tolerance window with no miscleavage constraint. Carbamidomethylation (+57.02146 Da) of cysteine was considered as a static modification. siRNA screening A549 cells (1,000 cells/well) in a 384-well plate were reverse transfected with 0.5 pmol of siRNA pool (S2 Table) targeting each gene using 0.1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (Thermo Fisher Scientific) (final siRNA concentration was 10 nM), followed by incubation at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 . At 72 h post-transfection, cells were infected (MOI = 0.05) with rLCMV/ZsG. siRNA target host-cell proteins were selected based on availability of validated siRNA sequences. The siRNAs we used to examine the effects on LCMV multiplication of knockdown expression of NP-interacting host cell protein candidate hits corresponded to the Genome-wide ON TAR-GET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene; Dharmacon, Lafayette, CO).
A549 cells (3.0 x 10 4 cells/well) were reverse transfected in a 24-well plate with 6 pmol of siRNA pools targeting each gene using 1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (final siRNA concentration is 10 nM). At 72 h post-transfection, total cell lysate was prepared in modified lysis A buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl [pH = 8.0], 50 mM NaCl, 1%Triton X-100, 1.25% sodium deoxycholate) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. The total protein concentration of clarified cell lysate was measured by Pierce BCA Protein Assay Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The same amount of protein from each sample was subjected to SDS-PAGE, and the protein expression of siRNA-targeted genes was analyzed by western blots.
Cells infected with eGFP-or ZsGreen-expressing rLCMV were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. After cell permeabilization by treatment with DB, cells were stained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). Green fluorescence (eGFP or ZsGreen) and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, Bio-Tek, Winooski, VT).
Mock-and virus-infected cells were fixed with 4% PFA. After cell permeabilization and blocking by treatment with DB containing 1% normal goat serum, cells were incubated with primary mouse anti ATP1A1 or PHB antibody followed by secondary anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluore 568 (anti-mouse IgG-AF568). Subsequently, cells were stained with VL-4-AF488. In some samples, primary antibody against ATP1A1 or PHB was omitted to determine background fluorescence. To visualize nuclei, DAPI Fluoromount-G (SouthernBiotech, Birmingham, AL) was used to mount coverslips on a slide glass. Stained cells were observed under a confocal microscope (LSM 710, Zeiss) and data analyzed by ZEN software (Zeiss). Co-localization analysis was performed on a pixel by pixel basis using Zen software (Zeiss). Eight green (NP-positive) cells were marked and every pixel in the marked area was plotted in the scatter diagram based on its intensity level from each channel. Thresholds for green and red channels were determined using mock-infected cells stained with VL-4-AF488 (anti-NP) and anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluor 568, without using anti-ATP1A1 or -PHB antibodies. Each pixel was assigned a value of 1. Co-localization coefficients (CC) (or non-weighted CC) were determined by dividing the sum of both green-and red-positive pixels by the sum of green positive pixels. This calculation was repeated for eight individual cells. To assess the specificity of co-localization, we determined weighted CC by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal. Comparison of non-weighted and weighted CC allowed us to determine whether brighter pixels were present in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions. p values were determined by a two-tailed paired t test using GraphPad Prism software.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 2 h, followed by infection with rLCMV/eGFP (MOI = 0.01). Compounds were present to study endpoint. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS, and eGFP expression was examined by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated and rLCMV/eGFP-infected cells were set to 100%. The IC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded in a 96-well plate (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions and cultured at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 48 h. Then, CellTiter 96 AQ ueous one solution reagent (Promega, Madison, WI) was added. Thereafter, the assay was performed according to the manufacturer's recommendations, and the absorbance (490 nm) was obtained using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) reader (SPECTRA max plus 384; Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated cells were set to 100%. The CC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A plasmid expressing C-terminus Strep-tagged Z protein (pC-LCMV-Z-Strep) was generated using similar procedure to generate a plasmid expressing C-terminus FLAG-tagged LASV Z protein (pC-LASV-Z-FLAG), and the budding assay was performed as previously described [88] . Cells (HEK 293T) in a 12-well plate were transfected with 0.5 μg of empty pCAGGS vector or pC-LCMV-Z-Strep or pC-LASV-Z-FLAG using Lipofectamine 2000. At 5 h post-transfection, media were replaced with fresh media and incubated at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 19 h. Then the cells were three times washed with fresh medium. After the removal of the last wash medium, cells were cultured in fresh medium containing ouabain (30 or 40 nM) or rocaglamide (50 or 100 nM) or equivalent concentration of DMSO, and 24 h later, virion-like particle (VLP)-containing TCS and cells were collected. Total cell lysate was prepared by lysing the cells with lysis buffer (1% NP-40, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 62.5 mM NaCl, 0.4% sodium deoxycholate). After clarification of TCS from cell debris by centrifugation at 400 x g and 4˚C for 10 min, VLPs were collected by ultracentrifugation at 100,000 x g and 4˚C for 30 min through a 20% sucrose cushion. VLPs were resuspended in PBS, and Z expression in total cell lysate and TCS (containing VLPs) were analyzed by western blots.
A549 cells infected with rLCMV/eGFP were harvested using Accutase cell detachment solution (Innovative Cell Technologies, San Diego, CA) and fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. eGFP expression was examined by flow cytometry using a BD LSR II (Becton Dickson), and data were analyzed with FlowJo (Tree Star, Inc., Ashland, OR).
293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected with scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were three times washed with fresh media to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of 40 nM of ouabain or vehicle control (DMSO). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayers of BHK-21 cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. Total cell lysate was prepared in cell lysis buffer (150 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% [NP-40], 1 mM of EDTA] and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. ZsGreen signal intensity in clarified cell lysate was measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek).
A549 cells seeded (2 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with combinations of different concentrations of ouabain and rocaglamide for 2 h and then infected (MOI = 0.01) with rLCMV/eGFP. Compounds were present in the culture medium throughout the experiment. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed, permeabilized by treatment with DB, and stained with DAPI. eGFP and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). eGFP readouts were normalized by DAPI readouts, and normalized data were used to analyze synergistic effect of the two compounds by the MacSynergy II program [89] .
Data were analyzed for p values by a two-tailed unpaired t test using GraphPad Prism software. | What factors did this study attribute to the efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses? | 5,158 | ATP1A1 and PHB | 34,103 |
1,687 | Interactome analysis of the lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus nucleoprotein in infected cells reveals ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit Alpha 1 and prohibitin as host-cell factors involved in the life cycle of mammarenaviruses
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834214/
SHA: efbd0dfc426da5dd25ce29411d6fa37571623773
Authors: Iwasaki, Masaharu; Minder, Petra; Caì, Yíngyún; Kuhn, Jens H.; Yates, John R.; Torbett, Bruce E.; de la Torre, Juan C.
Date: 2018-02-20
DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892
License: cc0
Abstract: Several mammalian arenaviruses (mammarenaviruses) cause hemorrhagic fevers in humans and pose serious public health concerns in their endemic regions. Additionally, mounting evidence indicates that the worldwide-distributed, prototypic mammarenavirus, lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance. Concerns about human-pathogenic mammarenaviruses are exacerbated by of the lack of licensed vaccines, and current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to off-label use of ribavirin that is only partially effective. Detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions may facilitate the development of novel anti-mammarenavirus strategies by targeting components of the host-cell machinery that are required for efficient virus multiplication. Here we document the generation of a recombinant LCMV encoding a nucleoprotein (NP) containing an affinity tag (rLCMV/Strep-NP) and its use to capture the NP-interactome in infected cells. Our proteomic approach combined with genetics and pharmacological validation assays identified ATPase Na(+)/K(+) transporting subunit alpha 1 (ATP1A1) and prohibitin (PHB) as pro-viral factors. Cell-based assays revealed that ATP1A1 and PHB are involved in different steps of the virus life cycle. Accordingly, we observed a synergistic inhibitory effect on LCMV multiplication with a combination of ATP1A1 and PHB inhibitors. We show that ATP1A1 inhibitors suppress multiplication of Lassa virus and Candid#1, a live-attenuated vaccine strain of Junín virus, suggesting that the requirement of ATP1A1 in virus multiplication is conserved among genetically distantly related mammarenaviruses. Our findings suggest that clinically approved inhibitors of ATP1A1, like digoxin, could be repurposed to treat infections by mammarenaviruses pathogenic for humans.
Text: Introduction Mammarenaviruses (Arenaviridae: Mammarenavirus) cause chronic infections of rodents worldwide [1] . Invasion of human dwellings by infected rodents can result in human infections through mucosal exposure to aerosols or by direct contact of abraded skin with infectious material. Several mammarenaviruses cause viral hemorrhagic fevers (VHFs) in humans and pose important public health problems in their endemic areas [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] . Mammarenaviruses are classified into two main groups, Old World (OW) and New World (NW) [1] . The OW Lassa virus (LASV), causative agent of Lassa fever (LF), is the most significant OW mammarenaviral pathogen. LASV is estimated to infect several hundred thousand individuals annually in Western Africa, resulting in a high number of LF cases associated with high morbidity and lethality. Moreover, LASV endemic regions are expanding [7] , and the association of the recently identified mammarenavirus Lujo virus with a VHF outbreak in Southern Africa [8, 9] has raised concerns about the emergence of novel VHF-causing mammarenaviruses. The most significant NW mammarenavirus is Junín virus (JUNV), which causes Argentinian hemorrhagic fever [10] . The worldwide-distributed OW mammarenavirus lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) is a neglected human pathogen of clinical significance especially in congenital infections [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] . Moreover, LCMV poses a particular threat to immunocompromised individuals, as has been illustrated by fatal cases of LCMV infection associated with organ transplants [16, 17] . However, LCMV research can be safely performed at BSL-2 containment, rather than the BSL-4 containment necessary for live LASV or JUNV research [18] .
No US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-licensed vaccines are available for the treatment of arenavirus infections, although a live attenuated vaccine strain of JUNV, Candid#1, is licensed in Argentina. Likewise, current anti-mammarenavirus therapy is limited to an offlabel use of the nucleoside analogue ribavirin that is only partially effective and can cause significant side effects [19] [20] [21] . Development of effective anti-mammarenavirus drugs has been hampered by the lack of detailed understanding of virus/host-cell interactions required for mammarenavirus multiplication that could represent amenable targets for antiviral therapy. the potential problem that overexpression of a single viral gene product may potentiate PPI interactions that are not relevant during the course of a natural virus infection. To overcome this issue, we designed a recombinant LCMV (rLCMV) encoding a tandem [WSHPQFEK (GGGS) 3 WSHPQFEK] Strep-tag fused to the amino-terminus of NP (rLCMV/Strep-NP) (Fig 1A and 1B) . To facilitate the identification of specific PPI between NP and host cell proteins, we used our mammarenavirus tri-segmented (r3) platform [30] to design an r3LCMV expressing a C-terminus Strep-tag version of enhanced green fluorescent protein (r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep) that we used as a negative control (Fig 1A and 1B) . We rescued rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep and confirmed the expression of strep-tagged NP and eGFP in rLCMV/ Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, respectively (Fig 1C) . Next, we examined the growth properties of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep in three different cells lines from hamsters, humans, and nonhuman primates (BHK-21, A549, and Vero E6 cells, respectively) (Fig 1D) . The fitness of rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep was modestly decreased compared to that observed with wild-type (WT) Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and Clone 13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains of LCMV. However, both rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep had WT-like growth kinetics and reached high titers. As with WT LCMV, infection with rLCMV/Strep-NP prevented production of bioactive IFN-I by cells in response to Sendai virus (SeV) infection as determined using an IFN bioassay based on protection against the cytopathic effect (CPE) induced by infection with vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) (Fig 1E) . Vero cells treated for 16 h with tissue cultured supernatants (TCS) from A549 cells infected first with WT LCMV or rLCMV/Strep, followed by 24 h infection with SeV, remained fully susceptible to VSV-induced CPE. In contrast, Vero cells treated with TCS from A549 cells infected with rLCMV/NP(D382A), a mutant unable to prevent induction of IFN-I [30] , and subsequently with SeV, were protected against VSV induced CPE.
We selected the human A549 cell line because lung epithelial cells are one of the initial cell targets of humans following inhalation of mammarenavirions. We infected A549 cells (multiplicity of infection [MOI] = 0.1) with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep (Fig 2A) . At 48 h post-inoculation (pi), we prepared total cell lysates for pull-down (PD) assays using a sepharose resin coated with strep-tactin. Aliquots of the protein complexes present in the PD samples were fractionated by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) (Fig 2B) followed by SYPRO Ruby protein gel staining. We compared the pattern of stained protein bands detected between rLCMV/Strep-NP-and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strepinfected samples and confirmed the presence of Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep in pertinent samples (Fig 2B) . Protein complexes in the rest of eluates from the PD samples were concentrated by trichloroacetic acid (TCA) precipitation and subjected to trypsin digestion (Fig 2A) . Digested peptides were subjected to liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) analysis using a hybrid mass spectrometer consisting of linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap (LTQ) Velos and an Orbitrap analyser.
We classified host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS analysis from two independent biological replicates into two groups: 1) proteins found only in Strep-NP PD samples with at least five spectral counts ( Table 1) , and 2) proteins found in both Strep-NP and eGFP-Strep PD samples with five or higher spectral counts in Strep-NP samples and at least 2-fold higher spectral counts in Strep-NP PD compared to eGFP PD samples ( Table 2) . Filtering the data using these criteria resulted in identification of 139 candidate host-cell proteins as NP-interacting partners. Among 53 proteins found present in both NP-and eGFP-PD samples, 36 had spectral counts in the NP-PD sample that were less than two-fold higher than their corresponding spectral counts in the eGFP-PD sample (Fig 2C and S1 Table) . Based on the criteria we described above, we considered these proteins to be highly unlikely specific NPinteractors with an involvement in the LCMV life cycle, and therefore we did not consider these hits for further analysis. However, we acknowledge that we cannot formally rule out that some of these hits could still play a role on the life cycle of LCMV.
The protein annotation through evolutionary relationship (PANTHER) protein family classification (Biological Process) of the NP-interacting protein candidates revealed that a large number of proteins were involved in metabolic and cellular processes (Fig 2D) . We also analyzed the molecular functions of the NP-interacting protein candidates according to the PAN-THER protein profile classification (Fig 2E) , which revealed diversified biochemical functions enriched for nucleic acid-binding proteins and chaperones.
To initially assess pro-or anti-viral roles of NP-interacting host-cell proteins identified by LC-MS/MS, we examined the effect of small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated knockdown (kd) of each of the corresponding genes on multiplication of rLCMV expressing reporter gene ZsGreen (ZsG) in A549 cells (Fig 3A) . The siRNAs we used were from the genome-wide ON TARGET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene). OTPs are latest generation of siRNAs and offer significant advantages over previous generations. Off-target effects are primarily driven by antisense strand microRNA (miR)-like seed activity. In OTPs, the sense strand is modified to favor antisense strand uptake whereas the antisense strand seed region is modified to drastically reduce seed-related off-targeting [33] . In addition, OTPs are designed on the foundation of the SMARTselection algorithm (Dharmacon), widely considered to be the best algorithm for rational siRNA design strategy. Numerous host-cell factors showed an anti-LCMV effect (increased ZsG expression by kd of the genes), including microtubule-associated protein 1B (MAP1B) [ [38] , dengue virus 2 (DENV-2) [39] , and chikungunya virus (CHIKV) [40] .
To begin assessing the potential biological implications of the identified NP-host cell protein interactions, we selected ATP1A1 and PHB given the availability of reagents, existing knowledge about their roles in cell physiology, and evidence of participation in multiplication of other viruses. We confirmed that cells transfected with siRNA specific to ATP1A1 and PHB exhibited the predicted reduced levels in ATP1A1 and PHB protein expression (Fig 3B) . Likewise, we examined whether siRNA-mediated reduced expression levels of ZsGreen correlated with reduced LCMV progeny titers. For this, we transfected A549 cells with siRNA targeting Expression of Strep-tagged proteins. A549 cells seeded (5.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 6-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMVs. At 48 h pi, total cell lysates were prepared, and protein expression was analyzed by western blotting. (D) Growth properties of rLCMV expressing Strep-tagged proteins. BHK-21 (1.75 x 10 5 cells/well), A549 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well), or Vero E6 (1.25 x 10 5 cells/well) cells seeded in 24-well plates and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.01) with the indicated rLCMVs. At the indicated times pi, TCSs were collected and virus titers determined by IFFA. Results represent means ± SD of the results of three independent experiments. (E) Lack of induction of IFN-I in cells infected with rLCMV/Strep-NP. A549 cells were infected (MOI = 0.1) with the indicated rLCMV or mock-infected, and 36 h later infected with SeV (MOI = 1). At 24 h pi with SeV, TCS were collected and used, following virus inactivation by U.V., to treat Vero E6 cells for 16 h, followed by infection with rVSV (MOI = 0.1) [rVSV(+)] or mockinfection [rVSV (-) ]. At 24 h pi with rVSV, cells were fixed with 4% PFA and stained with crystal violet to assess rVSV-induced cytopathic effect. We used as control rLCMV/NP(D382A) that contains mutation D382A within NP, which has been shown to abrogate the NP's ability to counteract the induction of IFN-I production.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1006892.g001 ATP1A1 or with NC siRNA 72 h prior to infection with rLCMV/ZsG. We found that siRNAmediated kd of ATP1A1 dramatically inhibited ZsGreen expression (Fig 3Ci) , which was associated with a significant reduction of infectious LCMV progeny (Fig 3Cii) . Our attempts to see interaction between NP and ATP1A1 or NP and PHB by co-immunoprecipitation were unsuccessful. Several possibilities could account for this, including interactions of low affinity or high on/off rate or both. Another consideration is that only a minor fraction of NP might be engaged in the interaction with a given host cell protein, and therefore, detection of these interactions would require highly sensitive methods such as LC-MS/MS. To overcome this problem we used confocal microscopy to examine the co-localization of NP with ATP1A1 and PHB in LCMV-infected cells. Weighted co-localization coefficients (CC), determined by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal, were significantly higher than non-weighted CC, indicating the presence of brighter pixels in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions (Fig 4) .
The cardiac glycoside ouabain is an inhibitor of ATP1A1 that has been used to treat congestive heart failure in European countries [41] . The PHB inhibitor rocaglamide is a flavagline from an Aglaia tree used in traditional Chinese medicine [42] that has potent anticancer activity [43] . To examine whether pharmacological inhibition of ATP1A1 or PHB inhibited LCMV multiplication, we pretreated human (A549 and HEK 293T), nonhuman primate (Vero E6), and rodent (murine L929 and hamster BHK-21) cells with ouabain or rocaglamide and infected them with rLCMV/eGFP (S1 Fig). Ouabain treatment resulted in a strong dosedependent inhibition of eGFP expression in infected human-and nonhuman primate cells, but did not affect eGFP expression intensity in infected rodent cells (S1A Fig) . This finding is consistent with rodents expressing an ATP1A1 allele that is resistant to ouabain inhibition [44] .
Likewise, we observed a dose-dependent rocaglamide inhibition of eGFP expression in all cell lines infected with rLCMV/eGFP (S1B Fig) . Consistent with these findings, production of infectious LCMV progeny was reduced by treatment with either ouabain or rocaglamide ( Fig 5A) within a concentration range that had minimal impact on cell viability (Fig 5B) . To examine the correlation between efficacy and cytotoxicity of these compounds, we determined their therapeutic index (TI = CC 50 /IC 50 (Fig 5Bi) ; whereas rocaglamide had TIs of >105 (CC 50 > 1000 nM, IC 50 = 9.51 nM) and 10.3 (CC 50 = 100 nM, IC 50 = 9.75 nM) in A549 and Vero E6 cells, respectively (Fig 5Bii) . Moreover, the ATP1A1 antagonist inhibitor, bufalin, also exhibited robust anti-LCMV activity with TIs of 8.92 (CC 50 Heat shock protein HSP 90-alpha HSP90AA1 P07900 8 10 9
Endoplasmin HSP90B1 P14625 9 9 9
Large neutral amino acids transporter small subunit 1 SLC7A5 Q01650 6 12 9
Keratin, type II cuticular Hb1 KRT81 Q14533 10 8 9
Putative helicase MOV-10 MOV10 Q9HCE1 8 10 9
Microtubule-associated protein 1B MAP1B P46821 6 11 8.5
Spectrin beta chain, rocaglamide (100 nM) (Fig 5C) , further supporting a specific anti-LCMV activity of ouabain and rocaglamide that was not due to reduced cell viability.
To gain insights about the mechanisms by which ouabain and rocaglamide exert their anti-LCMV activity, we examined effects of these compounds on distinct steps of the LCMV life cycle. First, we asked whether ouabain and rocaglamide affected cell entry of LCMV. We conducted time-of-addition experiments in which we treated cells with ouabain or rocaglamide prior to virus inoculation (-1.5 h), at the time of inoculation (0 h), or 1.5 h pi (+1.5 h) (Fig 6A) .
In some samples, we used ammonium chloride starting at 4 h pi to block multiple rounds of virus infection. The timing of compound addition did not significantly change the number of eGFP-positive cells, indicating that neither ouabain nor rocaglamide inhibited cell entry of LCMV. The number of eGFP + cells in ouabain-treated cells was reduced at all time-of-addition points compared to vehicle dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-treated cells, but was similar to that observed in ammonium chloride-treated cells. Thus, ouabain did not inhibit LCMV RNA replication and gene expression, but rather a late step of the LCMV life cycle. In contrast, rocaglamide treatment resulted in a negligible number of eGFP + cells, indicating that rocaglamide inhibited virus RNA replication and gene transcription.
To further investigate the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis, we infected A549 cells with a recombinant single-cycle infectious LCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) and treated cells with either ouabain or rocaglamide. Seventy-two hours later, we determined percent normalized eGFP expression in infected cells (Fig 6B) . Consistent with our results from the time-of-addition experiment, ouabain did not affect reporter eGFP expression. However, rocaglamide reduced eGFP expression, confirming inhibitory effect of rocaglamide on virus RNA synthesis.
We also examined the effect of ouabain and rocaglamide on the late step of the arenavirus life cycle, Z-mediated budding. For this experiment, we transfected cells with Z-Strep-and Z-FLAG (DYKDDDDK epitope)-expressing plasmids from LCMV and LASV, respectively. At 24 h post-transfection, we removed the tissue culture supernatant (TCS) and washed extensively transfected cells to eliminate already budded Z. We cultured the transfected cells in the presence or absence of ouabain or rocaglamide. At 24 h, we determined by WB levels of Z protein in both whole cell lysates and associated with virus-like particles (VLPs) collected from TCS. Treatment with rocaglamide, but not with ouabain, caused a reduction in both LCMV and LASV Z budding efficiency (Fig 6C and 6D) . The reproducibility of these findings was confirmed based on results from four independent experiments (Fig 6E) . We also examined whether ouabain could interfere with a step of assembly of infectious progeny that was not captured by the Z budding assay through two additional experiments. The first experiment involved the use of a newly generated single-cycle infectious recombinant LCMV expressing the reporter gene ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP) to infect (MOI = 0.1) A549 cells (1 st infection). These cells were subsequently transfected with a plasmid expressing LCMV GPC. After 24 h, we used TCS to infect a fresh cell monolayer (2 nd infection) and identified infected cells based on ZsGreen expression. To assess the effect of ouabain on de novo assembly of infectious progeny we determined normalized ratios (2 nd /1 st infection) of ZsGreen + cells (Fig 6F) . The second experiment involved infection (MOI = 0.1) of cells with WT LCMV, and 48 h later we washed infected cells three times to remove the extracellular infectious progeny produced during the first 48 h of infection. Then, fresh media containing ouabain or DMSO vehicle control were added, and 24 h later we determined virus titers in TCS (Fig 6G) . Results from both experiments consistently showed that ouabain did not inhibit assembly de novo of extracellular infectious virus.
Combination therapy can significantly alleviate the problem posed by the rapid emergence of drug-resistant variants commonly observed during monotherapy strategies to control RNA virus infections. Since ouabain and rocaglamide inhibited different steps of the LCMV life cycle, we examined whether their use in combination results in a synergistic anti-LCMV effect. For this experiment, we infected A549 cells with rLCMV/eGFP and treated them with ouabain and rocaglamide using different concentrations and combinations. At 48 h pi, we determined percent eGFP expression (Fig 7) . Combination treatment with ouabain and rocaglamide resulted in synergistic anti-LCMV activity that was enhanced under conditions using higher concentrations of ouabain and lower concentrations of rocaglamide.
We next asked whether the ATP1A1 and PHB host-cell factors contributed also to multiplication of viral hemorrhagic fever-causing LASV. We treated A549 cells with ouabain, bufalin, or rocaglamide and inoculated the treated cells with recombinant LASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP). eGFP expression was examined 48 h later. Similar to rLCMV infection, LASV multiplication was restricted in ouabain-, bufalin-, or rocaglamide-treated cells at concentrations minimally impacting cell viability, although their IC 50 values were slightly higher than those found with the LCMV infection system (Fig 5B and S2 Fig) as ouabain had IC 50 of 9.34 nM, bufalin had IC 50 of 1.66 nM and rocaglamide had IC 50 of 37.0 nM (Fig 8) . We also tested the effect of compounds targeting ATP1A1 and PHB on multiplication of JUNV. Consistent with our results obtained with LCMV and LASV, ouabain, bufalin, and rocaglamide strongly suppressed JUNV multiplication (S3 Fig). These findings indicate that ATP1A1 and PHB function as pro-viral factors of a range of mammarenaviruses.
We identified ATP1A1 and PHB as novel host-cell proteins that contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses. Our approach using a recombinant LCMV expressing NP with an affinity tag facilitated defining the NP interactome in the context of LCMV infection. Recently, using an NP-specific monoclonal antibody (mAb) to precipitate NP and associated cellular protein partners in a mammarenavirus NP interactome, King et al. identified 348 host proteins that associated with LCMV NP [45] . We found 99 common proteins between our filtered LCMV NP interactome of 171 proteins and the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. Differences in both experimental conditions and analysis methodologies used to generate the LCMV NP interactome documented by King et al. and ours likely h post-transfection, cells were washed with fresh media to eliminate Z-mediated production of VLPs in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain or Roc-A at the indicated concentrations. VLPs present in TCS were collected by ultracentrifugation, and cell lysates were prepared. Z protein expression in VLPs and cell lysates were determined by western blots using antibodies to Strep-tag (C) and FLAG-tag (D). Budding efficiency for each sample was estimated by dividing the signal intensity of the Z protein associated with VLPs by that of Z detected in the cell lysate. Numbers on the bottom of panel C correspond to LCMV Z budding efficiencies determined in a representative experiment. Results shown in panel E correspond to the average and SD from four independent experiments including the one shown in panel D. The mean budding efficiency of DMSO treatedsamples was set to 100%. Data represent mean ± SD of four independent experiments. (F) Effect of ouabain on incorporation of viral glycoprotein into virions. 293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected (MOI = 0.1) with scrLCMV/ZsG (1 st infection) for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were washed with fresh medium to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of ouabain at 40 nM (OUA). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayer of BHK-21 cells (2 nd infection) seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. ZsGreen signal intensity was measured by a fluorescent plate reader. GP-incorporation efficiency was estimated by dividing ZsGreen signal intensity in BHK-21 cell lysate (2 nd ) by that in 293T cell lysate (1 st ). The mean GP-incorporation efficiency of DMSO treated samples was set to 100%. Data represent means ± SD from three independent experiments. contributed to the observed differences between data sets. Despite progress in the implementation of global proteomics-based screens to identify virus-host protein-protein interactions, overlap between datasets for the same viral system is usually limited. However, the substantial overlap of 99 of the 171 NP-interacting proteins from both studies supports the overall reliability of both systems. We used results of the eGFP-Strep interactome, determined in r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep-infected cells, as a control to filter out non-specific NP interactions, which may have resulted in a higher degree of stringency than in the study by King et al for selection of NP-interacting candidates. The combined information provided by the NP interactome reported by King et al. and the one we present in this work, will facilitate future studies to further characterize the functional and biological implications of NP-host cell interacting proteins.
All tested mammarenavirus NPs, with exception of the NP from TCRV, blocked IRF-3-dependent IFN-I induction [25, 46] . The anti-IFN activity of NP was mapped to its C-terminal part and linked to the 3'-5' exonuclease domain present with the NP C-terminal part [30] . Inhibitor-B kinase ε (IKKε) was identified as an NP-binding protein using plasmid-mediated overexpression in transfected cells [47] , and the NP-IKKε binding affinity correlated with NP's ability to inhibit IFN-I induction [47] . We, as well as the work by King et al. [45] , did not detect this NP-IKKε interaction. This discrepancy may have been caused by very low expression of IKKε in LCMV-infected cells, which prevented detection of IKKε by LC-MS/MS. Alternatively, NP-IKKε interaction could possibility be temporarily regulated and take place at early times pi, but could be mostly absent at 48 h pi, the time at which we prepared the cell lysates for our proteomics studies. Future studies comparing the NP interactome at different times during infection will contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics of NP/hostcell protein interactions.
Na + /K + -ATPase is a well-characterized membrane ion transporter and is composed of two functional subunits (α and β) and one regulatory γ subunit [48] . ATP1A1 represents one of four α subunits [49, 50] . Recent evidence has suggested that the Na + /K + -ATPase is involved in multiple cell signaling pathways that are independent of its ion-pumping function [51] . Cardiac glycoside inhibitors of the Na + /K + -ATPase (NKA), so-called cardiotonic steroids (CST; e.g., ouabain, bufalin), have been shown to inhibit multiplication of different viruses including Ebola virus [35], coronaviruses [36], herpes simplex virus 1 [52, 53] , CHIKV [54] , human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) [55] , adenovirus [56] and porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 1 [57] .
Different mechanisms are likely to contribute to the antiviral activity of CSTs, including altered cell functions modulated by the signaling activity of Na + /K + -ATPase [58] . Thus, a low concentration of ouabain induces a conformational change in ATP1A1 that results in activation and release of proto-oncogene tyrosine protein kinase, Src, from ATP1A1, followed by activation of as yet unknown downstream signaling that inhibits, for instance, cell entry of murine hepatitis virus (MHV) [59] . However, our results indicated that ouabain did not interfere with LCMV cell entry. In addition, treatment with the Src inhibitor 4-amino-5-(4-methylphenyl)-7-(t-butyl)pyrazolo [3,4-d] pyrimidine (PP1) did not counteract the anti-LCMV activity of ouabain (S4 Fig). Nevertheless, ATP1A1-mediated Src signaling could plausibly contribute to the inhibitory effect of ouabain on JUNV multiplication as similarly to that observed with MHV. Moreover, cell entry of JUNV occurs also by clathrin-mediated endocytosis [60] , a process affected by Src signaling. Ouabain has been clinically used in several European countries for the management of congestive heart failure, whereas bufalin has been tested in clinical trials for cancer treatments [61] , and the CST digoxin has been FDA-approved since 1997 to treat heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Hence, opportunities for the repurposing CSTs have potential as therapeutics to treat infections caused by viral hemorrhagic fever-causing arenaviruses.
The PHB inhibitor, rocaglamide, appeared to interfere with LCMV RNA synthesis and budding, but did not affect LCMV cell entry. In contrast, PHB was reported to be a cell entry receptor for DENV-2 [39] and CHIKV [40] . On the other hand, PHB did not act as a virus cell entry receptor for HCV. Rather, PHB contributed to HCV cell entry through binding to cellular RAF (c-Raf; proto-oncogene serine/threonine-protein kinase) and subsequent Harvey rat sarcoma proto-oncogene (HRas) activation that induces a signal transduction pathway required for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mediated HCV cell entry [37] . In addition, siRNA-mediated kd of PHB decreased production of H5N1 FLUAV [38] . These findings indicate that PHB is involved in different steps of the life cycle of a variety of viruses, and thereby an attractive target for the development of broad-spectrum antiviral drugs.
Rocaglate is a group of natural compounds, which includes rocaglamide, that inhibits protein synthesis by targeting the ATP-dependent DEAD-box RNA helicase eukaryotic initiation factor 4A (eIF4A) and exerts anti-tumor activity [62, 63] . The rocaglate compound, silvestrol, inhibits Ebola virus multiplication likely by interfering with the role of eIF4A in viral protein translation [64] .
While we focused on two host proteins, ATP1A1 and PHB, in this study, our proteomics approach also identified several NP-interacting host-cell proteins whose kd expression via siRNA resulted in increased LCMV multiplication. These proteins, which included MAP1B, might have anti-LCMV activity. MAP1B has been shown to bind to nonstructural proteins 1 (NS1) and 2 (NS2) of human respiratory syncytial virus (HRSV) [34] . NS1 and NS2 of HRSV antagonizes host IFN-I response by reducing the levels of TNF receptor associated factor (TRAF3), IKKε (NS1), and STAT2 (NS2) [65] . NS2-MAP1B interaction interfered with HRSV NS2's ability to reduce levels of STAT2, whereas the role of NS1-MAP1B interaction remains to be determined [34] . Examining the role of NP-MAP1B interaction in modulating NP's ability to inhibit induction of type I IFN is of interest.
We identified among the NP-interacting host cell proteins the RNA helicase Moloney leukemia virus 10 (MOV10), which has been reported to be an antiviral factor for FLUAV [66] , retroviruses [67] [68] [69] [70] [71] , and DENV-2 [72] . We did not observe increased LCMV multiplication in cells subjected to siRNA-mediated kd of MOV10, a finding that would question an anti-LCMV activity of MOV10. However, we consider that LCMV has already optimal multiplication in A549 cells and further increases may occur only under rather unique conditions. MOV10 was shown to enhance IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction following SeV infection through a tank binding kinase 1 (TBK1)-independent and IKKε-dependent manner. This finding was further supported by demonstrating MOV10-IKKε interaction by co-immunoprecipitation studies [73] . We documented that the anti-IFN activity of mammarenavirus NP correlated with its ability to interact with IKKε [47] . Whether NP-MOV10 interaction prevents MOV10 from enhancing IRF-3-mediated IFN-I induction remains to be determined.
Several members of the mammalian chaperonin-containing T-complex (CCT) were identified as prominent hits in our NP interactome. The mammalian CCT is critical for folding of many proteins with important functions in diverse cellular processes [74] , and may protect complex protein topologies within its central cavity during biosynthesis and folding [75] . The contribution of CCT members to NP assembly into a nucleocapsid structure could account for their presence in the NP, but not eGFP, interactome. Interestingly, members of the CCT have been implicated in multiplication of different viruses including rabies virus [76, 77] , HCV [78] and FLUAV [79] . However, the role of these CCT proteins in virus multiplication remains unknown and may involve functions other than acting as molecular chaperones.
Previous studies documented the presence of several components of the of eIF4F, including 4A, within viral replication-transcription complexes (RTC) detected in cells infected with LCMV [80] and TCRV [81] . These findings, together with the detection of a number of ribosomal proteins in the NP interactome, suggest that translation of viral mRNAs may take place within RTC. However, rocaglamide interference with the activity of eIF4A within the viral RTC might contribute to its anti-LCMV activity.
In this work, we documented the generation of rLCMV/Strep-NP and its use to define the NP-interactome in infected cells. We presented evidence that ATP1A1 and PHB contribute to efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses using genetics and pharmacological inhibition of the genes. Consistent with our findings, bioinformatic analysis revealed that the protein network associated with ATP1A1 and PHB involves host cell proteins with functions in biological processes that have been implicated in virus multiplication (S5 Fig). The overall experimental approach described here can facilitate the identification of biologically relevant NP-interacting host-cell proteins. Future studies elucidating the roles of pro-and antiviral host-cell factors identified in this study in mammarenavirus multiplication will advance our understanding of the multiple functions of NP and uncover novel cellular targets for the development of antimammarenaviral drugs. In addition, by identifying proviral host-cell factors, drugs that are already approved can be repurposing as therapeutics to combat human pathogenic mammarenavirus infections.
Baby hamster kidney BHK-21 (American Type Culture Collection, ATCC, CCL-10), house mouse L929 (ATCC CCL-1), grivet Vero E6 (ATCC CRL-1586), human A549 (ATCC CCL-185), and human HEK 293T (ATCC CRL-3216) cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) containing 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, 2 mM of L-glutamine, 100 mg/ml of streptomycin, and 100 U/ml of penicillin at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 .
WT recombinant LCMVs, Armstrong (rLCMV ARM) and clone-13 (rLCMV Cl-13) strains, were generated as described [30, 82, 83] . Generation of rLCMV/NP(D382A) and SeV, strain Cantell, was described [30, 82, 83 ]. An rLCMV lacking GPC and expressing eGFP (rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP) was generated by reverse genetics using procedures previously described [84] . rLCMV/Strep-NP and r3LCMV/eGFP-Strep were generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate WT rLCMV and tri-segmented LCMV (r3LCMV) expressing eGFP [30] . For the generation of these novel rLCMVs, we created pol1S Cl-13 plasmids that directed Pol1-mediated intracellular synthesis of recombinant LCMV S genome RNA species coding for Strep-tagged NP or eGFP, respectively (Fig 1A and 1B) . The rLCMV expressing eGFP (rLCMV/eGFP) was generated as described [85] , and the rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (rLCMV/ZsG) instead of eGFP was generated by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMV/eGFP. Generation of rLASV expressing eGFP (rLASV/eGFP) will be described elsewhere. A tri-segmented recombinant live-attenuated Candid #1 strain of JUNV expressing eGFP (r3JUNV/eGFP) was generated as described [86] . For the generation of a novel single cycle rLCMV expressing ZsGreen (scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP), a pol1S plasmid was created by omitting GPC open reading frame (ORF) from pol1S plasmid used for the generation of rLCMV/ZsG. scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP was rescued by reverse genetics using similar procedures to generate rLCMVΔGPC/eGFP [84] .
LCMV titers were determined by immunofocus forming assay (IFFA) as described [87] . Briefly, 10-fold serial virus dilutions were used to infect Vero E6 cell monolayers in a 96-well plate, and at 20 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde (PFA) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). After cell permeabilization by treatment with dilution buffer (DB) (0.3% Triton X-100 in PBS-containing 3% bovine serum albumin [BSA]), cells were stained with a rat mAb to NP (VL-4, Bio X Cell, West Lebanon, NH) conjugated with Alexa Fluor 488 (VL-4-AF488, Protein Labeling Kit, Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA). VSV titers were determined by a plaque assay.
Total cell lysates were prepared in PD lysis buffer (+) (250 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% TritonX-100, 10% glycerol, 1 mM of MgCl 2 , 1 μM of CaCl 2 , 1 μM of ZnCl 2 ) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Clarified lysates were mixed at a 1:1 ratio with loading buffer (100 mM of Tris [pH 6.8], 20% 2-mercaptoethanol, 4% SDS, 0.2% bromophenol blue, 20% glycerol) and boiled for 5 min. Proteins samples were fractionated by SDS-PAGE using 4-20% gradient polyacrylamide gels (Mini-PROTEAN TGX gels 4-20%, Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA), and proteins were transferred by electroblotting onto polyvinylidene difluoride membranes (Immobilin Transfer Membranes, Millipore, Billerica, MA). To detect Strep-tagged proteins, membranes were reacted with mouse monoclonal antibodies to Strep (QIAGEN, Germantown, MD), eGFP (Takara Bio USA, Mountain View, CA), GP 2 (We33/ 36), ATP1A1 (TehrmoFisher Scientific, Rockford, IL), PHB (Abcam, Cambridge, MA) or rabbit polyclonal antibodies to α-tubulin (Cell Signaling Technologies, Danvers, MA) or glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH, Millipore), respectively, followed by incubation with appropriate horseradish peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse or anti-rabbit immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, West Grove, PA). SuperSignal West Pico or Femto chemiluminescent substrate (Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used to elicit chemiluminescent signals that were visualized using ImageQuant LAS 4000 Imager (GE Healthcare Bio-Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA).
Pull down of strep-tagged proteins from infected cell lysate. A549 cells prepared in six 15-cm dishes (approximately 1.0 x 10 8 cells in total) were infected with either rLCMV/Strep-NP or r3LCMV/eGFP at an MOI of 0.1. At 48 h pi, cells were washed three times with ice-cold PBS, scraped into fresh ice-cold PBS, and centrifuged at 400 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. Supernatant was removed, and cells were lysed with 12 ml of PD lysis buffer (+) supplemented with halt protease and phosphatase inhibitor cocktail (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and 5 μg/ml of deoxyribonuclease I (Worthington Biochemical Corporation, Lakewood, NJ). Lysate was clarified by centrifugation at 3,900 x g at 4˚C for 30 min to remove cell debris. Clarified cell lysate was then incubated with strep-tactin sepharose resin (QIAGEN) at 4˚C. After 2 h of incubation, the resin was washed three times with PD lysis buffer (+) and once with PD lysis buffer without TritonX-100 (PD lysis buffer [-] ). After the centrifugation at 1,600 x g and 4˚C for 5 min, the last wash buffer was removed, and protein complexes associated with the resin were eluted into 2 ml of PD lysis buffer (-) containing 2.5 mM of desthiobiotin. The eluate was then subjected to TCA precipitation followed by trypsin digestion.
Multidimensional protein identification technology microcolumn. A MudPIT microcolumn was prepared by first creating a Kasil frit at one end of an un-deactivated 250-μm outside diameter (OD) capillary tube (interior diameter of 360 μm)(Agilent Technologies, Inc., Santa Clara, CA). The Kasil frit was prepared by briefly dipping a 20-30-cm capillary tube in 300 μl of Kasil 1624 potassium silicate well-mixed solution (PQ Corporation, Malvern, PA) and 100 μl of formamide, curing at 100˚C for 4 h, and cutting the frit to a length of %2 mm. Strong cation exchange particles (SCX Luna, 5-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) were packed in-house from particle slurries in methanol to 2.5 cm. Reversed phase particles (2 cm, C18 Aqua, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were then successively packed onto the capillary tube using the same method as SCX loading.
MudPIT analysis. An analytical reversed-phase liquid chromatography column was generated by pulling a 100-μm (interior diameter (ID) of 360 μm) OD capillary tube (Polymicro Technologies, Phoenix, AZ) to 5-μm ID tip. Reversed-phase particles (Luna C18, 3-μm diameter, 125 Å pores, Phenomenex) were packed directly into the pulled column at 5.5 mPa until 15 cm long. The column was further packed, washed, and equilibrated at 10 mPa with buffer B (80% acetonitrile, 0.1% formic acid) followed by buffer A (5% acetonitrile and 0.1% formic acid). MudPIT and analytical columns were assembled using a zero-dead volume union (Upchurch Scientific, Oak Harbor, WA). LC-MS/MS analysis was performed with an Agilent high-pressure LC pump (Agilent) and linear quadrupole ion dual cell trap Orbitrap Velos (Thermo) using an in-house built electrospray stage. Electrospray was performed directly from the analytical column by applying the electrospray ionization (ESI) voltage at a tee (150 μm ID, Upchurch Scientific) directly downstream of a 1:1,000 split flow to reduce the flow rate to 300 nl/min through the columns. MudPIT experiments (10-step) were performed in which each step corresponds to 0, 10, 20, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90 , and 100% buffer C (500 mM of ammonium acetate, 0.1% formic acid, and 5% acetonitrile) and was run for 3 min at the beginning of a 110-min gradient.
Data analysis. Protein and peptide identification were performed with Integrated Proteomics Pipeline-IP2 (Integrated Proteomics Applications, San Diego, CA. http://www. integratedproteomics.com/) using ProLuCID and DTASelect2 algorithms. DTASelect parameters were-p 2 -y 1-trypstat-pfp .01 -extra-pI-DB-dm-in. Spectrum raw files were extracted into ms2 files from raw files using open source RawExtract 1.9.9 (Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA; http://fields.scripps.edu/downloads.php), and the tandem mass spectra were searched against a human protein database (UniprotKB). To accurately estimate peptide probabilities and false discovery rates, we used a decoy database containing the reversed sequences of all the proteins appended to the target database. Tandem mass spectra were matched to sequences using the ProLuCID algorithm with a 600-ppm peptide mass tolerance. ProLuCID searches were done on an Intel Xeon cluster processor running under the Linux operating system. The search space included half and fully tryptic peptide candidates that fell within the mass tolerance window with no miscleavage constraint. Carbamidomethylation (+57.02146 Da) of cysteine was considered as a static modification. siRNA screening A549 cells (1,000 cells/well) in a 384-well plate were reverse transfected with 0.5 pmol of siRNA pool (S2 Table) targeting each gene using 0.1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (Thermo Fisher Scientific) (final siRNA concentration was 10 nM), followed by incubation at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 . At 72 h post-transfection, cells were infected (MOI = 0.05) with rLCMV/ZsG. siRNA target host-cell proteins were selected based on availability of validated siRNA sequences. The siRNAs we used to examine the effects on LCMV multiplication of knockdown expression of NP-interacting host cell protein candidate hits corresponded to the Genome-wide ON TAR-GET-Plus (OTP) Human siRNA library (18,301 genes, 4 siRNAs/gene; Dharmacon, Lafayette, CO).
A549 cells (3.0 x 10 4 cells/well) were reverse transfected in a 24-well plate with 6 pmol of siRNA pools targeting each gene using 1 μl of Lipofectamine RNAiMAX (final siRNA concentration is 10 nM). At 72 h post-transfection, total cell lysate was prepared in modified lysis A buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl [pH = 8.0], 50 mM NaCl, 1%Triton X-100, 1.25% sodium deoxycholate) and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. The total protein concentration of clarified cell lysate was measured by Pierce BCA Protein Assay Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The same amount of protein from each sample was subjected to SDS-PAGE, and the protein expression of siRNA-targeted genes was analyzed by western blots.
Cells infected with eGFP-or ZsGreen-expressing rLCMV were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. After cell permeabilization by treatment with DB, cells were stained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). Green fluorescence (eGFP or ZsGreen) and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, Bio-Tek, Winooski, VT).
Mock-and virus-infected cells were fixed with 4% PFA. After cell permeabilization and blocking by treatment with DB containing 1% normal goat serum, cells were incubated with primary mouse anti ATP1A1 or PHB antibody followed by secondary anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluore 568 (anti-mouse IgG-AF568). Subsequently, cells were stained with VL-4-AF488. In some samples, primary antibody against ATP1A1 or PHB was omitted to determine background fluorescence. To visualize nuclei, DAPI Fluoromount-G (SouthernBiotech, Birmingham, AL) was used to mount coverslips on a slide glass. Stained cells were observed under a confocal microscope (LSM 710, Zeiss) and data analyzed by ZEN software (Zeiss). Co-localization analysis was performed on a pixel by pixel basis using Zen software (Zeiss). Eight green (NP-positive) cells were marked and every pixel in the marked area was plotted in the scatter diagram based on its intensity level from each channel. Thresholds for green and red channels were determined using mock-infected cells stained with VL-4-AF488 (anti-NP) and anti-mouse IgG antibody conjugated with Alexa Fluor 568, without using anti-ATP1A1 or -PHB antibodies. Each pixel was assigned a value of 1. Co-localization coefficients (CC) (or non-weighted CC) were determined by dividing the sum of both green-and red-positive pixels by the sum of green positive pixels. This calculation was repeated for eight individual cells. To assess the specificity of co-localization, we determined weighted CC by taking into consideration the brightness of each channel signal. Comparison of non-weighted and weighted CC allowed us to determine whether brighter pixels were present in the co-localized regions compared to the non-co-localized regions. p values were determined by a two-tailed paired t test using GraphPad Prism software.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 2 h, followed by infection with rLCMV/eGFP (MOI = 0.01). Compounds were present to study endpoint. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed with 4% PFA in PBS, and eGFP expression was examined by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated and rLCMV/eGFP-infected cells were set to 100%. The IC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A549 or Vero E6 cells seeded in a 96-well plate (2.0 x 10 4 cells/well) and cultured overnight were treated with 3-fold serial compound dilutions and cultured at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 48 h. Then, CellTiter 96 AQ ueous one solution reagent (Promega, Madison, WI) was added. Thereafter, the assay was performed according to the manufacturer's recommendations, and the absorbance (490 nm) was obtained using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) reader (SPECTRA max plus 384; Molecular Devices, Sunnyvale, CA). Mean values obtained with DMSO-treated cells were set to 100%. The CC 50 concentrations were determined using GraphPad Prism.
A plasmid expressing C-terminus Strep-tagged Z protein (pC-LCMV-Z-Strep) was generated using similar procedure to generate a plasmid expressing C-terminus FLAG-tagged LASV Z protein (pC-LASV-Z-FLAG), and the budding assay was performed as previously described [88] . Cells (HEK 293T) in a 12-well plate were transfected with 0.5 μg of empty pCAGGS vector or pC-LCMV-Z-Strep or pC-LASV-Z-FLAG using Lipofectamine 2000. At 5 h post-transfection, media were replaced with fresh media and incubated at 37˚C and 5% CO 2 for 19 h. Then the cells were three times washed with fresh medium. After the removal of the last wash medium, cells were cultured in fresh medium containing ouabain (30 or 40 nM) or rocaglamide (50 or 100 nM) or equivalent concentration of DMSO, and 24 h later, virion-like particle (VLP)-containing TCS and cells were collected. Total cell lysate was prepared by lysing the cells with lysis buffer (1% NP-40, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH 8.0], 62.5 mM NaCl, 0.4% sodium deoxycholate). After clarification of TCS from cell debris by centrifugation at 400 x g and 4˚C for 10 min, VLPs were collected by ultracentrifugation at 100,000 x g and 4˚C for 30 min through a 20% sucrose cushion. VLPs were resuspended in PBS, and Z expression in total cell lysate and TCS (containing VLPs) were analyzed by western blots.
A549 cells infected with rLCMV/eGFP were harvested using Accutase cell detachment solution (Innovative Cell Technologies, San Diego, CA) and fixed with 4% PFA in PBS. eGFP expression was examined by flow cytometry using a BD LSR II (Becton Dickson), and data were analyzed with FlowJo (Tree Star, Inc., Ashland, OR).
293T cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate and cultured overnight were infected with scrLCMV/ZsG-P2A-NP for 2 h and subsequently transfected with 0.5 μg of pC-GPC. At 24 h pi, cells were three times washed with fresh media to eliminate infectious virus particle produced in the absence of compound treatment, and cultured for another 24 h in fresh media in the presence of 40 nM of ouabain or vehicle control (DMSO). At 48 h pi, TCS was collected and used to infect fresh monolayers of BHK-21 cells seeded (4.0 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 12-well plate 1 day before the infection, and 293T cell lysate was prepared. 24 h later, BHK-21 cell lysate was prepared. Total cell lysate was prepared in cell lysis buffer (150 mM of NaCl, 50 mM of Tris-HCl [pH = 7.5], 0.5% [NP-40], 1 mM of EDTA] and clarified by centrifugation at 21,130 x g at 4˚C for 10 min. ZsGreen signal intensity in clarified cell lysate was measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek).
A549 cells seeded (2 x 10 5 cells/well) in a 96-well plate and cultured overnight were treated with combinations of different concentrations of ouabain and rocaglamide for 2 h and then infected (MOI = 0.01) with rLCMV/eGFP. Compounds were present in the culture medium throughout the experiment. At 48 h pi, cells were fixed, permeabilized by treatment with DB, and stained with DAPI. eGFP and DAPI signals were measured by a fluorescent plate reader (Synergy H4 Hybrid Multi-Mode Microplate Reader, BioTek). eGFP readouts were normalized by DAPI readouts, and normalized data were used to analyze synergistic effect of the two compounds by the MacSynergy II program [89] .
Data were analyzed for p values by a two-tailed unpaired t test using GraphPad Prism software. | How do the authors suggest that ATP1A1 and PHB contribute to the efficient multiplication of mammarenaviruses? | 5,159 | using genetics and pharmacological inhibition of the genes | 34,177 |
1,690 | Viruses and Evolution – Viruses First? A Personal Perspective
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433886/
SHA: f3b9fc0f8e0a431366196d3e835e1ec368b379d1
Authors: Moelling, Karin; Broecker, Felix
Date: 2019-03-19
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00523
License: cc-by
Abstract: The discovery of exoplanets within putative habitable zones revolutionized astrobiology in recent years. It stimulated interest in the question about the origin of life and its evolution. Here, we discuss what the roles of viruses might have been at the beginning of life and during evolution. Viruses are the most abundant biological entities on Earth. They are present everywhere, in our surrounding, the oceans, the soil and in every living being. Retroviruses contributed to about half of our genomic sequences and to the evolution of the mammalian placenta. Contemporary viruses reflect evolution ranging from the RNA world to the DNA-protein world. How far back can we trace their contribution? Earliest replicating and evolving entities are the ribozymes or viroids fulfilling several criteria of life. RNA can perform many aspects of life and influences our gene expression until today. The simplest structures with non-protein-coding information may represent models of life built on structural, not genetic information. Viruses today are obligatory parasites depending on host cells. Examples of how an independent lifestyle might have been lost include mitochondria, chloroplasts, Rickettsia and others, which used to be autonomous bacteria and became intracellular parasites or endosymbionts, thereby losing most of their genes. Even in vitro the loss of genes can be recapitulated all the way from coding to non-coding RNA. Furthermore, the giant viruses may indicate that there is no sharp border between living and non-living entities but an evolutionary continuum. Here, it is discussed how viruses can lose and gain genes, and that they are essential drivers of evolution. This discussion may stimulate the thinking about viruses as early possible forms of life. Apart from our view “viruses first”, there are others such as “proteins first” and “metabolism first.”
Text: Mycoplasma mycoides by systematic deletion of individual genes resulted in a synthetic minimal genome of 473 genes (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Can one consider simpler living entities?
There are elements with zero genes that fulfill many criteria for early life: ribozymes, catalytic RNAs closely related to viroids. They were recovered in vitro from 10 15 molecules (aptamers), 220 nucleotides in length, by 10 rounds of selection. Among the many RNA species present in this collection of quasispecies RNAs were catalytically active members, enzymatically active ribozymes. The sequence space for 220-mer RNAs is about 3 × 10 132 (Eigen, 1971; Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Brackett and Dieckmann, 2006) .
The selected ribozymes were able to replicate, cleave, join, and form peptide bonds. They can polymerize progeny chemically, allow for mutations to occur and can evolve. One molecule serves as catalyst, the other one as substrate. Replication of ribozymes was demonstrated in the test tube (Lincoln and Joyce, 2009) . Ribozymes can form peptide bonds between amino acids (Zhang and Cech, 1997) . Thus, small peptides were available by ribozyme activity. Consequently, an RNA modification has been proposed as peptide nucleic acid (PNA), with more stable peptide bonds instead of phosphodiester bonds (Zhang and Cech, 1997; Joyce, 2002) . Replication of RNA molecules can be performed chemically from RNA without polymerase enzymes. In addition, deoxyribozymes can form from ribonucleotides (Wilson and Szostak, 1999) . Thus, DNA can arise from RNA chemically, without the key protein enzyme, the reverse transcriptase.
An entire living world is possible from non-coding RNA (ncRNA) before evolution of the genetic code and protein enzymes. Ribozymes naturally consist of circular single-stranded RNAs (Orgel, 2004) . They lack the genetic triplet code and do not encode proteins. Instead, they exhibit structural information by hairpin-loops that form hydrogen bonds between incomplete double strands, and loops free to interact with other molecules. They represent a quasispecies in which many species of RNA may form, such as ribozymes, tRNA-like molecules, and other ncRNAs. RNAs within such a pool can bind amino acids. Ninety different amino acids have been identified on the Murchison meteorite found in Australia, while on Earth only about 20 of them are used for protein synthesis (Meierhenrich, 2008) . Where formation of ribozymes occurred on the early Earth is a matter of speculation. The hydrothermal vents such as black smokers in the deep ocean are possibilities where life may have started (Martin et al., 2008) . There, temperature gradients and clay containing minerals such as magnesium or manganese are available. Pores or niches offer possibilities for concentration of building blocks, which is required for chemical reactions to occur. Interestingly, also ice is a candidate for ribozyme formation and chemical reactions. Ice crystals displace the biomolecules into the liquid phase, which leads to concentration, creating a quasicellular compartmentalization where de novo synthesis of nucleotide precursors is promoted. There, RNA and ribozymes can emerge, which are capable of self-replication (Attwater et al., 2010) .
tRNA-amino acid complexes can find RNAs as "mRNAs." Such interactions could have contributed to the evolution of the genetic code. This sequence of events can lead to primitive ribosome precursors. Ribozymes are the essential catalytic elements in ribosomes: "The ribosome is a ribozyme" (Cech, 2000) , supplemented with about a hundred scaffold proteins later during evolution. The proteins have structural functions and contribute indirectly to enzymatic activity. Are these ribosomebound ribozymes fossils from the early Earth? Small peptides can be formed by ribozymes before ribosomes evolved, whereby single or dimeric amino acids may originate from the universe (Meierhenrich, 2008) .
Small peptides with basic amino acids can increase the catalytic activity of ribozymes as shown in vitro (Müller et al., 1994) . Such proteins are known as RNA-binding proteins from RNA viruses that protect the RNA genome, with motifs such as RAPRKKG of the nucleocapsid NCp7 of HIV (Schmalzbauer et al., 1996) . Peptides can enhance the catalytic activity of ribozymes up to a 100-fold (Müller et al., 1994) . Such peptides of RNA viruses serve as chaperones that remove higher ordered RNA structures, allowing for more efficient interaction of RNA molecules and increasing transcription rates of RNA polymerases (Müller et al., 1994) . Ribonucleoproteins may have also been functionally important during the evolution of ribosomes (Harish and Caetano-Anolles, 2012) .
These pre-ribosomal structures are also similar to precursorlike structures of retroviruses. Reverse transcription can be performed by ribozymes chemically. This action does not necessarily require a protein polymerase such as the reverse transcriptase. Similarly, deoxyribonucleotides can arise by removal of an oxygen without the need of a protein enzyme (a reductase) as today, and allow for DNA polymerization (Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Joyce, 2002) . The same elements of the precursors for ribosomes are also building blocks of retroviruses, which may have a similar evolutionary origin (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . tRNAs serve as primers for the reverse transcriptase, and the sequence of promoters of transposable elements are derived from tRNAs (Lander et al., 2001) . The ribozymes developed into more complex self-cleaving group II introns with insertion of genes encoding a reverse transcriptase and additional proteins (Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) (Figure 1) .
It came as a surprise that the genomes of almost all species are rich in ncDNA, transcribed into ncRNAs but not encoding proteins, as evidenced, for instance, by the "Encyclopedia of DNA Elements" (ENCODE) project. ncDNA amounts to more than 98% of the human DNA genome (Deveson et al., 2017) . Higher organisms tend to have more non-coding information, which allows for more complex modes of gene regulation. The ncRNAs are regulators of the protein-coding sequences. Highly complex organisms such as humans typically have a high number of ncRNA and regulatory mechanisms. ncRNA can range from close to zero in the smallest bacteria such as Pelagibacter ubique to about 98% in the human genome.
RNA viruses such as the retrovirus HIV harbor ncRNAs for gene regulation such as the trans-activating response element (TAR), the binding site for the Tat protein for early viral gene expression. Tat has a highly basic domain comprising mostly Lys and Arg residues, resembling other RNA binding proteins. ncRNA also serves on viral RNA genomes as ribosomal entry sites, primer binding sites or packaging signals. DNA synthesis depends on RNA synthesis as initial event, with RNA primers as starters for DNA replication, inside of cells as FIGURE 1 | A compartment is shown with essential components of life as discussed in the text. Non-coding RNA (ncRNA), ribozymes or viroids, can perform many steps for life without protein-coding genes but only by structural information. Individual amino acids are indicated as black dots and may be available on Earth from the universe. DNA may have existed before retroviruses. The compartment can be interpreted as pre-virus or pre-cell. Viroid, green; RNA, red; DNA, black.
well as during retroviral replication, proving a requirement of RNA (Flint, 2015) .
The number of mammalian protein-coding genes is about 20,000. Surprisingly, this is only a fifth of the number of genes of bread wheat (Appels et al., 2018) . Tulips, maize and other plants also have larger genomes, indicating that the number of genes does not necessarily reflect the complexity of an organism. What makes these plant genomes so large, is still an open question. Could the giant genomes possibly be the result to breeding of plants by farmers or gardeners?
According to Szostak there are molecules which appear like relics from the RNA world such as acetyl-CoA or vitamin B12, both of which are bound to a ribonucleotide for no obvious reason -was it "forgotten" to be removed? (Roberts and Szostak, 1997; Szostak et al., 2001; Szostak, 2011) . Perhaps the connected RNA serves as structural stabilizer. Lipid vesicles could have formed the first compartments and enclosed ribozymes, tRNAs with selected amino acids, and RNA which became mRNA. Is this a pre-cell or pre-virus (Figure 1) ? Patel et al. (2015) demonstrated that the building blocks of life, ribonucleotides, lipids and amino acids, can be formed from C, H, O, P, N, S in a "one pot" synthesis. This study can be regarded as a follow-up study of the classical Urey-Miller in vitro synthesis of biomolecules (Miller, 1953; Miller and Urey, 1959) . Transition from the RNA to the DNA world was promoted by the formation of the reverse transcriptase. The enzyme was first described in retroviruses but it is almost ubiquitous and found in numerous cellular species, many of which with unknown functions (Simon and Zimmerly, 2008; Lescot et al., 2016) . It is an important link between the RNA and the DNA worlds. The name reverse transcriptase is historical and irritating because it is the "real" transcriptase during the transition from the RNA to the DNA world. Similarly, the ribonuclease H (RNase H) is an essential enzyme of retroviruses (Mölling et al., 1971) . The RNase H turned out to be one of the five most frequent and ancient proteins (Ma et al., 2008 ) that belongs to a superfamily of more than sixty different unique representatives and 152 families with numerous functions (Majorek et al., 2014) .
Some of the many tRNAs can become loaded with amino acids. There are viruses containing tRNA-like structures (TLS), resembling these early RNAs (Dreher, 2009) . The TLS of these viruses typically bind to a single amino acid. TLS-viruses include plant viruses, such as Turnip yellow mosaic virus, in Peanut clump virus, Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), and Brome mosaic virus. Only half a tRNA is found in Narnaviruses of fungi. The amino acids known to be components of tRNA-like viruses are valine, histidine and tyrosine. The structures were also designated as "mimicry, " enhancing translation (Dreher, 2009 (Dreher, , 2010 . They look like "frozen" precursor-like elements for protein synthesis. This combination of a partial tRNA linked to one amino acid can be interpreted as an evolutionary early step toward protein synthesis, trapped in a viral element.
Ribozymes are related to the protein-free viroids. Viroids are virus-like elements that belong to the virosphere, the world of viruses (Chela-Flores, 1994) . Viroids lack protein coats and therefore were initially not designated as viruses but virus-like viroids when they were discovered in 1971 by Theodor Diener. He described viroids as "living fossils" (Diener, 2016) (Figure 2) .
From infected potatoes, Diener isolated the Potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd) whose genome was about a 100-fold smaller than those of viruses known at that time. The viroids known today are ranging from 246 to 467 nucleotides. They contain circular single-stranded RNA, are protein-free and self-replicating with no genetic information, but only structural FIGURE 2 | Viroids are hairpin-loop structures and are shown schematically and as electron micrograph. Viroids are, like ribozymes, without genetic information and play major biological roles today in plant diseases, in carnation flowers, in liver cancer, as catalyst of protein synthesis in ribosomes and as circular regulatory RNAs, as "sponges" for other regulatory RNAs.
information in the form of hairpin-loops (Riesner et al., 1979) . They can generate copies of themselves in the appropriate environment. They were designated as the "frontiers of life" (Flores et al., 2014) .
The knowledge of virus composition was based on TMV and its crystallization by Wendell Stanley in 1935 (Pennazio and Roggero, 2000) . The genome of TMV is protein-coding singlestranded RNA of about 6,400 nucleotides that is enclosed by a rod-like protein coat. Viroids, in contrast, do not encode proteins and lack coats but they are closely related to viruses. Viroids can lose their autonomy and rely on host RNA polymerases to replicate, are capable of infecting plants and many are economically important pathogens. There are two families, the nucleus-replicating Pospiviroidae such as PSTVd and the chloroplast-replicating Avsunviroidae like the Avocado sunblotch viroid (ASBVd). Their replication requires host enzymes. Thus, autonomy is replaced by dependence on host enzymes and an intracellular lifestyle.
Most viroids are often enzymatically active ribozymes -yet they are examples that this trait can get lost as a result of changing environmental conditions. Loss of ribozyme activity is a functional, not a genetic loss. Only the nuclear variants, the Pospiviroidae, can lose their ribozyme activity and use the cellular RNase III enzyme for their replication. In contrast, the Avsunviroidae are still active hammerhead ribozymes. Thus, inside the nucleus of a host cell, the enzymatic RNA function can become unnecessary. Not genes, but a function, the catalytic activity, gets lost.
Viroids did apparently not gain genes but cooperated for a more complex lifestyle. For example, Carnation small viroid-like RNA (CarSV RNA) cooperates with a retrovirus and is accompanied by a homologous DNA generated by a reverse transcriptase. This enzyme presumably originates from a pararetrovirus of plants. Pararetroviruses package virus particles at a different stage during replication than retroviruses, the DNA, not the RNA. This unique combination between two viral elements has so far only been detected with CarSV in carnation flowers (Flores et al., 2005 (Flores et al., , 2014 . Why did such a cooperation evolve -perhaps by breeding gardeners? RNA is sensitive to degradation; therefore, genetic increase and growth of the genome may not be favorable energetically -at least not in plants. Gain of function is, in this case, cooperation.
The circular RNA (circRNA) is related to ribozymes/viroids as a chief regulator of other regulatory RNAs, a "sponge" absorbing small RNAs. Micro RNAs (miRNAs) are post-transcriptional regulators that are affected by the presence of circRNAs. circRNAs were detected in human and mouse brains and testes as well as in plants. They can bind 70 conserved miRNAs in a cell and amount up to 25,000 molecules (Hansen et al., 2013) . Their structure is reminiscent of catalytically active ribozymes.
There is an exceptional viroid that gained coding information and entered the human liver (Taylor, 2009) . The viroid is known as hepatitis delta virus (HDV). It has the smallest genome of any known animal virus of about 1,680 nucleotides. It has properties typical of viroids, since it contains circRNA, forms similar hairpin-loops and replicates in the nucleus using host enzymes. Two polymerases have to redirect their specificity from DNA to RNA to generate the HDV genome and antigenome. Both of them have ribozyme activity. In contrast to other ribozymes, HDV encodes a protein, the hepatitis delta antigen (HDVAg) that occurs in two forms, the small-HDVAg (24 kDa) supporting replication and the large-HDVAg (27 kDa) that helps virion assembly. The gene was presumably picked up from the host cell by recombination of HDV's mRNA intermediate with a host mRNA. Transmission depends on a helper virus, the Hepatitis B virus (HBV), which delivers the coat (Taylor, 2009 ) Does packaging by a helper virus protect the genome and thereby allow for a larger viroid to exist?
In plants, viroids may not be able to become bigger possibly due to their sensitivity to degradation -but they cannot become much smaller either. Only a single viroid is known that is completely composed of protein-coding RNA with triplets (AbouHaidar et al., 2014). Viroids and related replicating RNAs are error-prone replicating units and the error frequency imposes a certain minimal size onto them, as they would otherwise become extinct. This mechanism has been described as "error catastrophe, " which prevents survival (Eigen, 1971 (Eigen, , 2013 . The viroids and related RNAs are the smallest known replicons. Smaller ones would become extinct in the absence of repair systems.
In summary, RNA can catalyze many reactions. Protein enzymes which may have evolved later have higher catalytic activities. Ribozymes are carriers of information, but do not require coding genes. Information is stored in their sequence and structure. Thus, replication of an initial RNA is followed by flow of information, from DNA to RNA to protein, as described the Central Dogma (Crick, 1968) . Even an information flow from protein to DNA has been described for some archaeal proteins (Béguin et al., 2015) . The DNA-protein world contains numerous ncRNAs with key functions. ncRNA may serve as a model compound for the origin of life on other planets. Hereby not the chemical composition of this molecule is of prime relevance, but its simplicity and multifunctionality. Furthermore, RNA is software and hardware in a single molecule, which makes it unique in our world. There are other scenarios besides the here discussed "virus-first, " such as "protein-first", "metabolism-fist" or the "lipid world" (Segré et al., 2001; Andras and Andras, 2005; Vasas et al., 2010; Moelling, 2012) . Some of these alternative concepts were built on phylogenomics, the reconstruction of the tree of life by genome sequencing (Delsuc et al., 2005) . Surprisingly, it was Sir Francis Crick, one of the discoverers of the DNA double-helix, who stated that he would not be surprised about a world completely built of RNA. A similar prediction was made by Walter Gilbert (Crick, 1968; Gilbert, 1986) . What a vision! Our world was almost 50 years later defined as "RNAprotein" world (Altman, 2013) . One can speculate our world was built of ribozymes or viroids, which means "viruses first."
ncRNAs appear as relics from the past RNA world, before DNA, the genetic code and proteins evolved. However, ncRNA is essential in our biological DNA world today. It is possible to produce such ncRNA today in the test tube by loss of genic information from protein-coding RNA. This reduction to ncRNA was demonstrated in vitro with phage RNA. Phage Qβ genomic RNA, 4,217 nucleotides in length, was incubated in the presence of Qβ replicase, free nucleotides and salts, a rich milieu in the test tube. The RNA was allowed to replicate by means of the Qβ replicase. Serial transfer of aliquots to fresh medium led to ever faster replication rates and reduction of genomic size, down to 218 nucleotides of ncRNA in 74 generations. This study demonstrated that, depending on environmental conditions, an extreme gene reduction can take place. This experiment performed in 1965 was designated as "Spiegelman's Monster." Coding RNA became replicating ncRNA (Spiegelman et al., 1965; Kacian et al., 1972) ! Manfred Eigen extended this experiment and demonstrated further that a mixture containing no RNA to start with but only ribonucleotides and the Qβ replicase can under the right conditions in a test tube spontaneously generate self-replicating ncRNA. This evolved into a form similar to Spiegelman's Monster. The presence of the replicase enzyme was still necessary in these studies. Furthermore, a change in enzyme concentration and addition of short RNAs or an RNA intercalator influenced the arising RNA population (Sumper and Luce, 1975; Eigen, 2013) . Thus, the complexity of genomes depends on the environment: poor conditions lead to increased complexity and rich environments to reduced complexity.
The process demonstrated in this experiment with viral components indicates that reversion to simplicity, reduction in size, loss of genetic information and speed in replication can be major forces of life, even though this appears to be like a reversion of evolution. The experiment can perhaps be generalized from the test tube to a principle, that the most successful survivors on our planet are the viruses and microorganisms, which became the most abundant entities. Perhaps life can start from there again.
These studies raise the question of how RNA molecules can become longer, if the small polymers become smaller and smaller, replicate faster and outcompete longer ones. This may be overcome by heat flow across an open pore in submerged rocks, which concentrates replicating oligonucleotides from a constant feeding flow and selection for longer strands. This has been described for an increase from 100 to 1,000 nucleotides in vitro. RNA molecules shorter than 75 nucleotides will die out (Kreysing et al., 2015) . Could a poor environment lead to an increase of complexity? This could be tested. Ribozymes were shown to grow in size by uptake of genes, as demonstrated for HDV (Taylor, 2009 ).
An interesting recent unexpected example supporting the notion that environmental conditions influence genetic complexity, is the human gut microbiome. Its complexity increases with diverse food, while uniform rich food reduces its diversity and may lead to diseases such as obesity. Colonization of the human intestinal tract starts at birth. A few dozen bacterial and viral/phage species are conserved between individuals (core sequences) as a stable composition (Broecker et al., 2016c . Dysbiosis has been observed in several chronic diseases and in obesity, a loss of bacterial richness and diversity. Nutrition under affluent conditions with sugar-rich food contributes to obesity, which results in a significant reduction of the complexity of the microbiome. This reduction is difficult to revert (Cotillard et al., 2013; Le Chatelier et al., 2013) . The gut microbiome in human patients with obesity is reminiscent of the gene reduction described in the Spiegelman's Monster experiment: reduction of genes in a rich environment.
The reduction of the complexity of the microbiome is in part attributed to the action of phages, which under such conditions, defined as stress, lyse the bacteria. Fecal microbiota transplantation can even be replaced by soluble fractions containing phages or metabolites from the donor without bacteria (Ott et al., 2017) . Analogously, the most highly complex microbiomes are found in indigenous human tribes in Africa, which live on a broad variety of different nutrients. It is a slow process, though, to increase gut microbiota complexity by diverse nutrition. The obesity-associated microbiota that survive are fitter and more difficult to counteract. Urbanization and westernization of the diet is associated with a loss of microbial biodiversity, loss of microbial organisms and genes (Segata, 2015) .
To understand the mechanism and driving force for genome reduction, deletion rates were tested by insertion of an indicator gene into the Salmonella enterica genome. The loss of the indicator gene was monitored by serial passage in rich medium. After 1,000 generations about 25% of the deletions caused increased bacterial fitness. Deletions resulted in smaller genomes with reduced or absence of DNA repair genes (Koskiniemi et al., 2012) . Gene loss conferred a higher fitness to the bacteria under these experimental conditions.
The recently discovered mimiviruses and other giant viruses are worth considering for understanding the evolution of life with respect to the contribution of viruses. Their hosts are, for example, Acanthamoeba, Chlorella, and Coccolithus algae (Emiliania huxleyi), but also corals or sponges as discussed more recently. Mimiviruses were first discovered in cooling water towers in Bradford, United Kingdom in 2003 with about 1,000 genes, most of which unrelated to previously known genes. Mimiviruses have received attention because they contain elements that were considered hallmarks of living cells, not of viruses, such as elements required for protein synthesis, tRNAs and amino acid transferases. The mimiviruses harbor these building blocks as incomplete sets not sufficient for independent protein synthesis as bacteria or archaea can perform, preventing them from leading an autonomous life (La Scola et al., 2003 Scola et al., , 2008 . They are larger than some bacteria. Giant viruses can be looked at as being on an evolutionary path toward a cellular organism. Alternatively, they may have evolved from a cellular organism by loss of genetic information (Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015) . Giant viruses have frequently taken up genes from their hosts by horizontal gene transfer (HGT) (La Scola et al., 2008; Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015; Colson et al., 2018) . A graph on genome sizes shows that mimiviruses and bacteria overlap in size, indicating a continuous transition between viruses and bacteria and between living and non-living worlds (based on Holmes, 2011) (Figure 3) . Other giant viruses, such as megaviruses, were discovered in the ocean of Chile with 1,120 genes. Most recently the Klosneuvirus was identified in the sewage of the monastery Klosterneuburg in Austria in 2017 with 1.57 million (mio) basepairs (Mitch, 2017) . Pithovirus sibericum is the largest among giant viruses discovered to date with a diameter of 1.5 microns, a genome of 470,000 bp with 467 putative genes, 1.6 microns in length, and it is presumably 30,000 years old as it was recovered from permafrost in Siberia (Legendre et al., 2014) . The smaller Pandoraviruses with 1 micron in length have five times larger genomes, 2,500,000 bp (Philippe et al., 2013) (Figure 3) .
The giant viruses can even be hosts to smaller viruses, the virophages, reminiscent of bacteriophages, the viruses of bacteria. These virophages such as Sputnik are only 50 nm in size with 18,343 bp of circular dsDNA and 21 predicted proteincoding genes. They replicate in viral factories and consume the resources of the mimivirus, thereby destroying it. Some, virophages can even integrate into the genome of the cellular host and can be reactivated when the host is infected by giant viruses. Thus, giant viruses suggest that viruses are close to living entities or may have been alive (La Scola et al., 2008; Fischer and Hackl, 2016) . In biology it is common to distinguish between living and dead matter by the ability to synthesize proteins and replicate autonomously. The giant viruses may be considered as missing link between the two, because they harbor "almost" the protein synthesis apparatus. The transition from living to the non-living world is continuous, not separated by a sharp borderline (Figure 3) .
Viruses are not considered alive by most of the scientific community and as written in textbooks, because they cannot replicate autonomously. Yet some of the giant viruses are equipped with almost all components of the protein synthesis machinery close to bacteria suggesting that they belong to the living matter (Schulz et al., 2017) . The ribozymes may have been the earliest replicating entity. Perhaps also other viruses were initially more independent of the early Earth than they are today. As described in Figure 1 there may have been initially no major difference between an early virus or an early cell. Only later viruses may have given up their autonomous replication and became parasites -as has been described for some bacteria (see below).
Efforts have been made to identify the smallest living cell that is still autonomously replicating. Among the presumably smallest naturally occurring bacteria is Pelagibacter ubique of the SAR11 clade of bacteria (Giovannoni, 2017) , which was discovered in 1990. It is an alpha-proteobacterium with 1,389 genes present ubiquitously in all oceans. It can reach up to 10 28 free living cells in total and represents about 25% of microbial plankton cells. Very little of its DNA is non-coding. It harbors podophage-type phages, designated as "pelagiphage" (Zhao et al., 2013) . This small bacterium was designated as the most common organism on the planet. Why is it so successful? This autonomous bacterium is smaller than some parasitic giant viruses. Craig Venter, who first succeeded in sequencing the human genome, tried to minimize the putative smallest genome of a living species, from Mycoplasma mycoides, a parasitic bacterium that lives in ruminants (Gibson et al., 2008 (Gibson et al., , 2010 . His group synthesized a genome of 531,000 bp with 473 genes, 149 of them (32%) with unknown functions (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Among the smallest parasitic living organisms is Nanoarchaeum equitans. It is a thermophile archaeon which lives at 80 • C and at pH 6 with 2% salt (Huber et al., 2003) . Its genome has a size of 490,000 bp and encodes 540 genes. N. equitans is an obligate symbiont of a bigger archaeon, Ignicoccus riding on it as on a horse, hence the name (Huber et al., 2003) .
The world of viruses covers a range of three logs in size of their genomes: from zero genes to about 2,500 genes amounting to about 2,500,000 bp of DNA. The zero-gene viroids are about 300 bases in length (Figure 3) .
The virosphere is the most successful reservoir of biological entities on our planet in terms of numbers of particles, speed of replication, growth rates, and sequence space. There are about 10 33 viruses on our planet and they are present in every single existing species (Suttle, 2005) .
There is no living species without viruses! Viruses also occur freely in the oceans, in the soil, in clouds up to the stratosphere and higher, to at least 300 km in altitude. They populate the human intestine, birth canal, and the outside of the body as protective layer against microbial populations. Microbes contain phages that are activated during stress conditions such as lack of nutrients, change in temperatures, lack of space and other changes of environmental conditions.
One of the most earth-shaking papers of this century was the publication of the human genome sequence (Lander et al., 2001) . About half, possibly even two-thirds of the sequence are composed of more or less complete endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) and related retroelements (REs) (de Koning et al., 2011) . REs amplify via copy-and-paste mechanisms involving a reverse transcriptase step from an RNA intermediate into DNA. In addition, DNA transposable elements (TEs) move by a cutand-paste mechanism. The origin of REs is being discussed as remnants of ancient retroviral germline infections that became evolutionarily fixed in the genome. About 450,000 human ERV (HERV) elements constitute about 8% of the human genome consisting of hallmark retroviral elements like the gag, pol, env genes and flanking long terminal repeats (LTR) that act as promoters (Lander et al., 2001) . Howard Temin, one of the discoverers of the reverse transcriptase, in 1985 already described endogenous retrovirus-like elements, which he estimated to about 10% of the human and mouse genome sequence (Temin, 1985) . The actual number is about 45% as estimated today (Lander et al., 2001) . In some genes such as the Protein Kinase Inhibitor B (PKIB) gene we determined about 70% retrovirusrelated sequences (Moelling and Broecker, 2015) . Is there a limit? Could it have been 100%? Retroviruses are estimated to have entered the lineage of the mammalian genome 550 million years ago (MYA) (Hayward, 2017) . Older ERV sequences may exist but are unrecognizable today due to the accumulation of mutations.
ERVs undergo mutations, deletions or homologous recombination events with large deletions and can become as short as solo LTR elements, which are a few hundred bp in length -the left-overs from full-length retroviral genomes of about 10,000 bp. The LTR promoters can deregulate neighboring genes. Homologous recombination events may be considered as gene loss or gene reduction events. It is the assumption that the ERVs, which were no longer needed for host cell defense, were no longer selected for by evolution and consequently deleted as unnecessary consumers of energy.
Eugene Koonin points out that infection and integration are unique events occurring at a fast pace, while loss and gene reduction may take much longer time frames (Wolf and Koonin, 2013) .
A frequent gene reduction of eukaryotic genomes is the loss of the viral envelope protein encoded by the env gene. Without a coat, retroviruses can no longer leave the cell and infect other cells. They lose mobility and become obligatory intracellular elements. Helper viruses can supply envelope proteins in trans and mobilize the viruses. TEs or REs can be regarded as examples of coat-free intracellular virus relics -or could it have been the other way round, perhaps precursors of full-length retroviruses?
These elements can be amplified intracellularly and modify the host genomes by integration with the potential danger of gene disruption and genetic changes. REs can lead to gene duplications and pseudogene development, with one copy for stable conservation of acquired functions and the other one for innovations (Cotton and Page, 2005) . Such duplications constitute large amounts of mammalian genomes (Zhang, 2003) . Retroviruses have an RNase H moiety duplication, one of which serves as a catalytically inactive linker between the RT polymerase and the enzymatically active RNase H (Xiong and Eickbush, 1990; Malik and Eickbush, 2001; Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) . This gene duplication dates back to 500 mio years (Cotton and Page, 2005) .
Gene duplications are a common cause of cancer, which often occurs only in the genome of the cancer cell itself, less affecting offsprings. Myc, Myb, ErbB2, Ras, and Raf are oncogenes amplified in diverse types of human cancers (Vogelstein and Kinzler, 2002) . The ability of retroviruses to integrate makes them distinct from endosymbionts which stay separate. Yet the net result is very similar, acquisition of new genetic information, which is transmitted to the next generation, if the germline is infected and endogenization of the virus occurred.
Viral integration is not limited to eukaryotic cells but also a mechanism in prokaryotes for maintenance of the lysogenic state of phages inside bacteria.
Also, for other eukaryotic viruses such as HBV, the envelope surface antigen BHsAg can be deleted, which leads to an obligatory intracellular life style for the virus, which especially in the presence of HCV promotes cancer (Yang et al., 2016) .
HIV has been shown to rapidly lose one of its auxiliary genes, nef, originally for negative factor. The gene was lost within a rather low number of passages of the virus grown under tissue culture conditions by selection for high virus titer producing cells. Deletion of nef resulted in a significant increase of the virus titer in culture -hence the name. The nef gene product was of no need inside tissue culture cells, rather it was inhibitory for replication. However, it is essential for pathogenicity in animals, and subsequently nef was reinterpreted as "necessary factor" (Flint, 2015) .
Also, the human hosts of HIV can lose a significant terminal portion of a seven transmembrane receptor in lymphocytes, the primary target cell for HIV entry and for virus uptake. This molecule, the CCR5 cytokine receptor is truncated by 32 carboxy-terminal amino acids (CCR5-32), disabling the receptor functionally. The allele frequency of the mutant CCR5-32 mutant is about 10% in the European population, making these people resistant to HIV infections (Solloch et al., 2017) . This gene loss in Europeans has been shown to make the individuals resistant not only against HIV infection but also against malaria. This may have been the selective pressure in the past before HIV/AIDS arose. No side effect for humans lacking this gene has been described (Galvani and Slatkin, 2003) .
Viruses have been proven to be drivers of evolution (Villarreal and Witzany, 2010) , including the human genome, which by at least 45% is composed of sequences related to retroviruses. In addition, endogenized retroviruses supplied the syncytin genes that are essential for the development of the mammalian placenta, and allowed the growth of embryos without its rejection by the maternal immune system (Dupressoir et al., 2012) . Thus, the same property which causes immunodeficiency in HIV-infected patients and leads to AIDS causes syncytia formation, cell fusion after infection by a retrovirus. Viruses have also been proposed to be at the origin of the evolution of adaptive immunity (Villarreal, 2009 ). Thus, viruses shaped genomes by supplying essential genes and mechanisms.
Endogenization of retroviruses has occurred in the mammalian genomes for at least 550 mio years (Hayward, 2017) . If the integrated ERVs did not provide any selective advantage, they deteriorated and accumulated mutations with loss of function. This was directly proven by reconstruction of an infectious retrovirus from the consensus sequence of 9 defective endogenous virus sequences, designated as Phoenix. The virus was expressed from a constructed synthetic DNA clone in cell culture and formed virus particles identified by high resolution microscopic analysis (Dewannieux and Heidmann, 2013) .
The koalas in Australia are currently undergoing endogenization of a retrovirus (koala retrovirus, KoRV) in "real time" and demonstrate possible consequences for immunity. In the early 1900s, some individuals were transferred to islands, including Kangaroo Island, close to the Australian mainland for repopulation purposes, as koalas were threatened to become extinct. Today, the majority of the koala population is infected by KoRV, which is closely related to the Gibbon ape leukemia virus (GALV). Yet, koalas isolated on Kangaroo Island are KoRV negative, which allows dating the introduction of KoRV into the koala population to about one hundred years ago. Many of the infected koalas fell ill and died, yet some populations became resistant within about 100 years, corresponding to about 10 generations. The koalas likely developed resistance due to the integrated DNA proviruses. The retrovirus is transmitted as exogenous as well as endogenous virus, similar to the Jaagsiekte sheep retrovirus (JSRV), whereby the endogenized viruses protect with a viral gene product, such as Env, against de novo infections by "superinfection exclusion" (Tarlinton, 2012) . The contribution of retroviruses to the antiviral defense is striking, since all retroviral genes have analogous genes in the siRNA/RNAi defense mechanism of eukaryotic cells (Moelling et al., 2006) .
Retroviruses can protect against infection by other related viruses, for example, by expressing Env proteins that block cellsurface receptors (Villarreal, 2011) . A comparable mechanism protects bacterial cells against DNA phages, by integrated phage DNA fragments that are transcribed into mRNA and hybridize to incoming new DNA phages and thereby lead to their destruction by hybrid-specific nucleases, CRISPR/Cas immunity (Charpentier and Doudna, 2013) . It is often not realized that immunity acquisition in bacteria and mammalian cells follow analogous mechanisms (Figure 4) .
Integration of retroviruses normally occurs in somatic cells after infection as an obligatory step during the viral life cycle. Infection of germline cells can lead to transmission to the next generation and ultimately result in inherited resistance. Endogenized retroviruses likely caused resistance FIGURE 4 | Viruses protect against viruses: retroviruses protect a cell against a new infection by a similar virus designated as "superinfection exclusion" or viral interference. This is mediated by viral gene products such as proteins or nucleic acids. Similarly, phages protect against phages: superinfection of bacteria is prevented by CRISPR/Cas RNA originating from previous infections. The mechanisms of defense against viruses and phages are analogous. Protection by viruses or phages against superinfections represents cellular defense and acquired immunity. The four examples are discussed in the text.
to the exogenous counterparts. Similarly, resistance to Simian Immune Deficiency virus (SIV) in some monkey species may be explained by endogenization (Li et al., 2017 (Li et al., , 2018 . In the case of phages and their prokaryotic hosts the mechanism is described as CRISPR/Cas, which follow analogous principles of "endogenization" of incoming genetic material for subsequent exclusion.
One may speculate that HIV may also eventually become endogenized into the human genome. There is some evidence that HIV can infect human germline cells and can be transmitted to the embryonic genome (Wang et al., 2011) . How long this may take is not known -10 generations?
The loss of function of ERVs can occur by mutations, deletions of the env or other genes and ultimately all coding genes by homologous recombination, leaving behind only one LTR. The number of retrovirus-like elements add up to about 450,000, corresponding to 8% of the human genome (Lander et al., 2001; Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). The promoter regions were analyzed for their contribution to cancer by activating neighboring genes -as a consequence of a former retrovirus infection. Indeed, activated cellular genes by "downstream promotion" were identified in animal studies with activation of the myc gene as one of many examples, leading to chronic, not acute development of cancer (Ott et al., 2013) . As a general mechanism for human cancer today the LTRs are, however, not identified as a major culprit. Most of the ERVs we find today have been integrated during evolution in introns or other regions where their presence is relatively harmless. Did the other ones result in death of the carriers which disappeared? The effects of LTRs on the expression levels of neighboring host genes was studied with the endogenous human virus, HERV-K, as a possible cause of cancer, but this appears not to be a general phenomenon (Broecker et al., 2016b) . As shown for the koalas, ERVs can confer immunity to viral infections (Feschotte and Gilbert, 2012) .
A related ERV, HERV-H, was shown to produce an RNA that keeps early embryonic cells pluripotent and even revert adult cells to regain pluripotency (Grow et al., 2015) . Thus, the role of ERVs may be more complex than we presently know.
Transposable elements and REs that lost the ability of cellular transmission by deletion of the coat protein majorly contribute to genetic complexity of host cells. They are "locked" inside the cells and are major drivers of the increase of genetic complexity (Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). One could speculate that these intracellular elements are replicationincompetent retroviruses lacking coats (Lander et al., 2001) . Bats transmit viruses such as Ebola and SARS coronavirus without suffering from disease (Beltz, 2018) . Even RNA viruses such as Bornaviruses have been shown to integrate by illegitimate reverse transcription, possibly also supplying immunity against superinfection (Katzourakis and Gifford, 2010) .
There are two prominent events that significantly contributed to the success of life and the formation of cells. Both of them are associated with gene reduction. This phenomenon may play a role for the evolution of viruses from autonomous to parasitic lifestyles. In the 1960s Lynn Margulis proposed an extracellular origin for mitochondria (Margulis, 1970 (Margulis, , 1993 ). An ancestral cell, perhaps an archaeon, was infected by an anaerobic bacterium, which gave rise to mitochondria. Similarly, cyanobacteria formed the chloroplasts in modern plant cells. Mitochondria arose around 1.45 billion years ago (BYA) (Embley and Martin, 2006) . Mitochondria and chloroplasts are the most striking examples for a change in lifestyle from autonomous bacteria to endosymbionts. This transition is often considered as extremely rare and a hallmark of evolution of life on our planet. However, there are many other obligate intracellular parasites such as Rickettsia, Chlamydia trachomatis, Coxiella burnetii (the causative agent of Q fever), Mycobacterium leprae, M. tuberculosis, and M. mycoides (Beare et al., 2006) .
The change of lifestyle of the endosymbionts in the two cases of mitochondria and chloroplasts is striking. Both of them drastically reduced their genetic make-up. Mitochondria contain less than 37 genes, left from the original about 3,000 genes. Is endogenization of retroviruses, the ERVs, which are integrated into germline cells, related to endosymbiosis? Are these endosymbionts models for the transition from autonomous lifestyle to a parasitic life-which may have taken place with viruses? A more recent typical example for a reductive evolution are Rickettsia. These bacteria were assumed for some time to be viruses because of their obligatory intracellular parasitic existence. Rickettsia have evolved from autonomously replicating bacteria. Reductive evolution of endosymbionts can yield bacteria with tiny genomes on the expense of autonomous extracellular life. Their genomes are 1.11 mio bp in length with about 834 protein-coding genes, and loss of 24% by reductive evolution (Ogata et al., 2001) . Rickettsia may have some relationship with cyanobacteria, which are considered as the major symbionts.
Can one speculate that viruses may have been autonomous entities initially? Viroids may have undergone transition from autonomy to parasites, just as shown for mitochondria, chloroplasts or Rickettsia? To which extent have viruses been autonomous and independent of cellular metabolisms originally -and contributed to the origin of cells? Could they only later have lost their autonomy and become parasitic?
Viruses are minimalistic in their composition and must have undergone stringent gene reductions (Flint, 2015) . How small can their genomes become? Most coding RNA viruses still contain regulatory elements, ncRNA at the 3 and 5 terminal regions for ribosomal entry, protein synthesis, transcriptional regulation, and others.
A subgroup of retroviruses is an interesting example in respect to simultaneous loss and gain of genetic information. The oncogenic retroviruses or tumorviruses can recombine with cellular genes which under the promoters of retroviruses can become oncogenes and drivers of cancer. About a hundred oncogenes have been selected for in the laboratories and studied over decades for understanding the molecular mechanisms of cancer. Selection for growth advantages of the host cells led to the discovery of the fastest growth-promoting oncogenes we know today, such as Ras, Raf, ErbB or Myc, which are in part successful targets for anticancer drugs (Moelling et al., 1984) .
These oncogenes were in most cases taken up by the retroviruses at the expense of structural (gag), replicating (pol) or envelope (env) genes, and are often expressed as fusion proteins with Gag. Thus, oncogenic retroviruses are obligatory intracellular defective viruses and were selected for in the laboratory by researchers for the oncogenes with the most potent growth promoting ability. They need the supply of replicatory genes in trans from co-infecting helper viruses to infect other cells (Flint, 2015) . Retroviruses are able to pick up cellular genes, transfer and integrate them into neighboring cells. Some strains of Rous sarcoma virus maintain replication competent when carrying the cell-derived src (for sarcoma) oncogene encoding a protein of 536 amino acids that apparently can fit into the retroviral particle along with the full-size viral genome (Broecker et al., 2016a) . Spatial reasons may have influenced the formation of oncogenic retroviruses and limited their size and thereby led to their defective phenotypes.
There are indications that the uncontrolled activity of (retro)transposons in germline cells can result in diseases such as male infertility -presumably by "error catastrophe, " caused by too many transposition events. In mammals, piRNAs tame transposon activity by means of the RNase H activity of PIWI proteins during spermatogenesis (Girard et al., 2006) .
Only a minority of viruses are pathogens; most of them do not cause diseases. On the contrary, they are most important as drivers of evolution, as transmitters of genetic material, as innovative agents. In particular, the RNA viruses are the most innovative ones. Some of them are pathogenic and dangerous, such as HIV or influenza virus, or viroids in plants. RNA viruses are able to change so rapidly that the host immune system is unable to counteract the infection. Pathogenicity arises when environmental conditions change, for instance, when a virus enters a new organism or species.
Increase of cellular complexity by viruses is an important feature of evolution. Such major evolutionary changes are recently taken as arguments against the evolutionary theory by Charles Darwin who considered gradual changes, small increments by mutations as the main basis for selection and evolution. New criticism is addressing this thinking, considering larger changes as evolutionary drivers. Such changes arise by many complex phenomena such as endosymbiosis, infection by prokaryotes, viruses and fungi, recombination of genes, HGT, infections, sex. Dramatic changes such as endosymbiosis or pathogen infections extend Darwin's concept of evolution.
There are numerous examples for the contribution of viruses to the evolution of life since at least as long as 550 MYA (Hayward, 2017) . But genetic noise through random mutations does not allow us to go back to the origin of life. It may not be impossible that the earliest compartment was indistinguishable, either a pre-cell or a pre-virus. By analogy one may speculate that at some point autonomous viruses gave up independence for an obligatory intracellular life -as has been described for mitochondria and chloroplasts but also intracellular bacteria such as Rickettsia. This speculation is based on the concept that early life must have started simple and with high genetic variability and then became more complex. But complexity can be given up for a less energy consuming lifestyle with small genomes and high speed of replication (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . Therefore, the question may be repeated: "Are viruses our oldest ancestors?" Some fossil life can be partially reproduced in vitro by Spiegelman's Monster and Eigen's follow-up experiments, explaining the great surviving potential of simple ncRNA.
Viruses can be pathogens, but their recognition as primarily causing diseases is wrong. This notion is based on the history of viruses in medicine, as explained in a book entitled "Viruses: More Friends Than Foes" (Moelling, 2017) . The scenario described here focuses on viruses as drivers of evolution.
The early RNA world gained interest 20-30 years ago as evidenced by the references provided above. Surprisingly, there are scientists who still believe in the "pansperm hypothesis" and think that retroviruses are of extraterrestric origin (Steele et al., 2018) . The recent interest in the origin of life arose from the newly discovered exoplanets whose number increases daily -and which may be as numerous as 10 25 . Thus, pure statistics make some people believe that there is extraterrestrial life.
The extraterrestric life is mimicked in laboratories on Earth with many assumptions -perhaps this overview stimulates some thinking. The discussion presented here should be taken as concept about simple replicating and evolving entities possibly arising from different building blocks in other environments, with structure being more relevant than sequence. | Which are the most abundant biological entities on Earth? | 1,175 | Viruses | 574 |
1,690 | Viruses and Evolution – Viruses First? A Personal Perspective
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433886/
SHA: f3b9fc0f8e0a431366196d3e835e1ec368b379d1
Authors: Moelling, Karin; Broecker, Felix
Date: 2019-03-19
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00523
License: cc-by
Abstract: The discovery of exoplanets within putative habitable zones revolutionized astrobiology in recent years. It stimulated interest in the question about the origin of life and its evolution. Here, we discuss what the roles of viruses might have been at the beginning of life and during evolution. Viruses are the most abundant biological entities on Earth. They are present everywhere, in our surrounding, the oceans, the soil and in every living being. Retroviruses contributed to about half of our genomic sequences and to the evolution of the mammalian placenta. Contemporary viruses reflect evolution ranging from the RNA world to the DNA-protein world. How far back can we trace their contribution? Earliest replicating and evolving entities are the ribozymes or viroids fulfilling several criteria of life. RNA can perform many aspects of life and influences our gene expression until today. The simplest structures with non-protein-coding information may represent models of life built on structural, not genetic information. Viruses today are obligatory parasites depending on host cells. Examples of how an independent lifestyle might have been lost include mitochondria, chloroplasts, Rickettsia and others, which used to be autonomous bacteria and became intracellular parasites or endosymbionts, thereby losing most of their genes. Even in vitro the loss of genes can be recapitulated all the way from coding to non-coding RNA. Furthermore, the giant viruses may indicate that there is no sharp border between living and non-living entities but an evolutionary continuum. Here, it is discussed how viruses can lose and gain genes, and that they are essential drivers of evolution. This discussion may stimulate the thinking about viruses as early possible forms of life. Apart from our view “viruses first”, there are others such as “proteins first” and “metabolism first.”
Text: Mycoplasma mycoides by systematic deletion of individual genes resulted in a synthetic minimal genome of 473 genes (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Can one consider simpler living entities?
There are elements with zero genes that fulfill many criteria for early life: ribozymes, catalytic RNAs closely related to viroids. They were recovered in vitro from 10 15 molecules (aptamers), 220 nucleotides in length, by 10 rounds of selection. Among the many RNA species present in this collection of quasispecies RNAs were catalytically active members, enzymatically active ribozymes. The sequence space for 220-mer RNAs is about 3 × 10 132 (Eigen, 1971; Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Brackett and Dieckmann, 2006) .
The selected ribozymes were able to replicate, cleave, join, and form peptide bonds. They can polymerize progeny chemically, allow for mutations to occur and can evolve. One molecule serves as catalyst, the other one as substrate. Replication of ribozymes was demonstrated in the test tube (Lincoln and Joyce, 2009) . Ribozymes can form peptide bonds between amino acids (Zhang and Cech, 1997) . Thus, small peptides were available by ribozyme activity. Consequently, an RNA modification has been proposed as peptide nucleic acid (PNA), with more stable peptide bonds instead of phosphodiester bonds (Zhang and Cech, 1997; Joyce, 2002) . Replication of RNA molecules can be performed chemically from RNA without polymerase enzymes. In addition, deoxyribozymes can form from ribonucleotides (Wilson and Szostak, 1999) . Thus, DNA can arise from RNA chemically, without the key protein enzyme, the reverse transcriptase.
An entire living world is possible from non-coding RNA (ncRNA) before evolution of the genetic code and protein enzymes. Ribozymes naturally consist of circular single-stranded RNAs (Orgel, 2004) . They lack the genetic triplet code and do not encode proteins. Instead, they exhibit structural information by hairpin-loops that form hydrogen bonds between incomplete double strands, and loops free to interact with other molecules. They represent a quasispecies in which many species of RNA may form, such as ribozymes, tRNA-like molecules, and other ncRNAs. RNAs within such a pool can bind amino acids. Ninety different amino acids have been identified on the Murchison meteorite found in Australia, while on Earth only about 20 of them are used for protein synthesis (Meierhenrich, 2008) . Where formation of ribozymes occurred on the early Earth is a matter of speculation. The hydrothermal vents such as black smokers in the deep ocean are possibilities where life may have started (Martin et al., 2008) . There, temperature gradients and clay containing minerals such as magnesium or manganese are available. Pores or niches offer possibilities for concentration of building blocks, which is required for chemical reactions to occur. Interestingly, also ice is a candidate for ribozyme formation and chemical reactions. Ice crystals displace the biomolecules into the liquid phase, which leads to concentration, creating a quasicellular compartmentalization where de novo synthesis of nucleotide precursors is promoted. There, RNA and ribozymes can emerge, which are capable of self-replication (Attwater et al., 2010) .
tRNA-amino acid complexes can find RNAs as "mRNAs." Such interactions could have contributed to the evolution of the genetic code. This sequence of events can lead to primitive ribosome precursors. Ribozymes are the essential catalytic elements in ribosomes: "The ribosome is a ribozyme" (Cech, 2000) , supplemented with about a hundred scaffold proteins later during evolution. The proteins have structural functions and contribute indirectly to enzymatic activity. Are these ribosomebound ribozymes fossils from the early Earth? Small peptides can be formed by ribozymes before ribosomes evolved, whereby single or dimeric amino acids may originate from the universe (Meierhenrich, 2008) .
Small peptides with basic amino acids can increase the catalytic activity of ribozymes as shown in vitro (Müller et al., 1994) . Such proteins are known as RNA-binding proteins from RNA viruses that protect the RNA genome, with motifs such as RAPRKKG of the nucleocapsid NCp7 of HIV (Schmalzbauer et al., 1996) . Peptides can enhance the catalytic activity of ribozymes up to a 100-fold (Müller et al., 1994) . Such peptides of RNA viruses serve as chaperones that remove higher ordered RNA structures, allowing for more efficient interaction of RNA molecules and increasing transcription rates of RNA polymerases (Müller et al., 1994) . Ribonucleoproteins may have also been functionally important during the evolution of ribosomes (Harish and Caetano-Anolles, 2012) .
These pre-ribosomal structures are also similar to precursorlike structures of retroviruses. Reverse transcription can be performed by ribozymes chemically. This action does not necessarily require a protein polymerase such as the reverse transcriptase. Similarly, deoxyribonucleotides can arise by removal of an oxygen without the need of a protein enzyme (a reductase) as today, and allow for DNA polymerization (Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Joyce, 2002) . The same elements of the precursors for ribosomes are also building blocks of retroviruses, which may have a similar evolutionary origin (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . tRNAs serve as primers for the reverse transcriptase, and the sequence of promoters of transposable elements are derived from tRNAs (Lander et al., 2001) . The ribozymes developed into more complex self-cleaving group II introns with insertion of genes encoding a reverse transcriptase and additional proteins (Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) (Figure 1) .
It came as a surprise that the genomes of almost all species are rich in ncDNA, transcribed into ncRNAs but not encoding proteins, as evidenced, for instance, by the "Encyclopedia of DNA Elements" (ENCODE) project. ncDNA amounts to more than 98% of the human DNA genome (Deveson et al., 2017) . Higher organisms tend to have more non-coding information, which allows for more complex modes of gene regulation. The ncRNAs are regulators of the protein-coding sequences. Highly complex organisms such as humans typically have a high number of ncRNA and regulatory mechanisms. ncRNA can range from close to zero in the smallest bacteria such as Pelagibacter ubique to about 98% in the human genome.
RNA viruses such as the retrovirus HIV harbor ncRNAs for gene regulation such as the trans-activating response element (TAR), the binding site for the Tat protein for early viral gene expression. Tat has a highly basic domain comprising mostly Lys and Arg residues, resembling other RNA binding proteins. ncRNA also serves on viral RNA genomes as ribosomal entry sites, primer binding sites or packaging signals. DNA synthesis depends on RNA synthesis as initial event, with RNA primers as starters for DNA replication, inside of cells as FIGURE 1 | A compartment is shown with essential components of life as discussed in the text. Non-coding RNA (ncRNA), ribozymes or viroids, can perform many steps for life without protein-coding genes but only by structural information. Individual amino acids are indicated as black dots and may be available on Earth from the universe. DNA may have existed before retroviruses. The compartment can be interpreted as pre-virus or pre-cell. Viroid, green; RNA, red; DNA, black.
well as during retroviral replication, proving a requirement of RNA (Flint, 2015) .
The number of mammalian protein-coding genes is about 20,000. Surprisingly, this is only a fifth of the number of genes of bread wheat (Appels et al., 2018) . Tulips, maize and other plants also have larger genomes, indicating that the number of genes does not necessarily reflect the complexity of an organism. What makes these plant genomes so large, is still an open question. Could the giant genomes possibly be the result to breeding of plants by farmers or gardeners?
According to Szostak there are molecules which appear like relics from the RNA world such as acetyl-CoA or vitamin B12, both of which are bound to a ribonucleotide for no obvious reason -was it "forgotten" to be removed? (Roberts and Szostak, 1997; Szostak et al., 2001; Szostak, 2011) . Perhaps the connected RNA serves as structural stabilizer. Lipid vesicles could have formed the first compartments and enclosed ribozymes, tRNAs with selected amino acids, and RNA which became mRNA. Is this a pre-cell or pre-virus (Figure 1) ? Patel et al. (2015) demonstrated that the building blocks of life, ribonucleotides, lipids and amino acids, can be formed from C, H, O, P, N, S in a "one pot" synthesis. This study can be regarded as a follow-up study of the classical Urey-Miller in vitro synthesis of biomolecules (Miller, 1953; Miller and Urey, 1959) . Transition from the RNA to the DNA world was promoted by the formation of the reverse transcriptase. The enzyme was first described in retroviruses but it is almost ubiquitous and found in numerous cellular species, many of which with unknown functions (Simon and Zimmerly, 2008; Lescot et al., 2016) . It is an important link between the RNA and the DNA worlds. The name reverse transcriptase is historical and irritating because it is the "real" transcriptase during the transition from the RNA to the DNA world. Similarly, the ribonuclease H (RNase H) is an essential enzyme of retroviruses (Mölling et al., 1971) . The RNase H turned out to be one of the five most frequent and ancient proteins (Ma et al., 2008 ) that belongs to a superfamily of more than sixty different unique representatives and 152 families with numerous functions (Majorek et al., 2014) .
Some of the many tRNAs can become loaded with amino acids. There are viruses containing tRNA-like structures (TLS), resembling these early RNAs (Dreher, 2009) . The TLS of these viruses typically bind to a single amino acid. TLS-viruses include plant viruses, such as Turnip yellow mosaic virus, in Peanut clump virus, Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), and Brome mosaic virus. Only half a tRNA is found in Narnaviruses of fungi. The amino acids known to be components of tRNA-like viruses are valine, histidine and tyrosine. The structures were also designated as "mimicry, " enhancing translation (Dreher, 2009 (Dreher, , 2010 . They look like "frozen" precursor-like elements for protein synthesis. This combination of a partial tRNA linked to one amino acid can be interpreted as an evolutionary early step toward protein synthesis, trapped in a viral element.
Ribozymes are related to the protein-free viroids. Viroids are virus-like elements that belong to the virosphere, the world of viruses (Chela-Flores, 1994) . Viroids lack protein coats and therefore were initially not designated as viruses but virus-like viroids when they were discovered in 1971 by Theodor Diener. He described viroids as "living fossils" (Diener, 2016) (Figure 2) .
From infected potatoes, Diener isolated the Potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd) whose genome was about a 100-fold smaller than those of viruses known at that time. The viroids known today are ranging from 246 to 467 nucleotides. They contain circular single-stranded RNA, are protein-free and self-replicating with no genetic information, but only structural FIGURE 2 | Viroids are hairpin-loop structures and are shown schematically and as electron micrograph. Viroids are, like ribozymes, without genetic information and play major biological roles today in plant diseases, in carnation flowers, in liver cancer, as catalyst of protein synthesis in ribosomes and as circular regulatory RNAs, as "sponges" for other regulatory RNAs.
information in the form of hairpin-loops (Riesner et al., 1979) . They can generate copies of themselves in the appropriate environment. They were designated as the "frontiers of life" (Flores et al., 2014) .
The knowledge of virus composition was based on TMV and its crystallization by Wendell Stanley in 1935 (Pennazio and Roggero, 2000) . The genome of TMV is protein-coding singlestranded RNA of about 6,400 nucleotides that is enclosed by a rod-like protein coat. Viroids, in contrast, do not encode proteins and lack coats but they are closely related to viruses. Viroids can lose their autonomy and rely on host RNA polymerases to replicate, are capable of infecting plants and many are economically important pathogens. There are two families, the nucleus-replicating Pospiviroidae such as PSTVd and the chloroplast-replicating Avsunviroidae like the Avocado sunblotch viroid (ASBVd). Their replication requires host enzymes. Thus, autonomy is replaced by dependence on host enzymes and an intracellular lifestyle.
Most viroids are often enzymatically active ribozymes -yet they are examples that this trait can get lost as a result of changing environmental conditions. Loss of ribozyme activity is a functional, not a genetic loss. Only the nuclear variants, the Pospiviroidae, can lose their ribozyme activity and use the cellular RNase III enzyme for their replication. In contrast, the Avsunviroidae are still active hammerhead ribozymes. Thus, inside the nucleus of a host cell, the enzymatic RNA function can become unnecessary. Not genes, but a function, the catalytic activity, gets lost.
Viroids did apparently not gain genes but cooperated for a more complex lifestyle. For example, Carnation small viroid-like RNA (CarSV RNA) cooperates with a retrovirus and is accompanied by a homologous DNA generated by a reverse transcriptase. This enzyme presumably originates from a pararetrovirus of plants. Pararetroviruses package virus particles at a different stage during replication than retroviruses, the DNA, not the RNA. This unique combination between two viral elements has so far only been detected with CarSV in carnation flowers (Flores et al., 2005 (Flores et al., , 2014 . Why did such a cooperation evolve -perhaps by breeding gardeners? RNA is sensitive to degradation; therefore, genetic increase and growth of the genome may not be favorable energetically -at least not in plants. Gain of function is, in this case, cooperation.
The circular RNA (circRNA) is related to ribozymes/viroids as a chief regulator of other regulatory RNAs, a "sponge" absorbing small RNAs. Micro RNAs (miRNAs) are post-transcriptional regulators that are affected by the presence of circRNAs. circRNAs were detected in human and mouse brains and testes as well as in plants. They can bind 70 conserved miRNAs in a cell and amount up to 25,000 molecules (Hansen et al., 2013) . Their structure is reminiscent of catalytically active ribozymes.
There is an exceptional viroid that gained coding information and entered the human liver (Taylor, 2009) . The viroid is known as hepatitis delta virus (HDV). It has the smallest genome of any known animal virus of about 1,680 nucleotides. It has properties typical of viroids, since it contains circRNA, forms similar hairpin-loops and replicates in the nucleus using host enzymes. Two polymerases have to redirect their specificity from DNA to RNA to generate the HDV genome and antigenome. Both of them have ribozyme activity. In contrast to other ribozymes, HDV encodes a protein, the hepatitis delta antigen (HDVAg) that occurs in two forms, the small-HDVAg (24 kDa) supporting replication and the large-HDVAg (27 kDa) that helps virion assembly. The gene was presumably picked up from the host cell by recombination of HDV's mRNA intermediate with a host mRNA. Transmission depends on a helper virus, the Hepatitis B virus (HBV), which delivers the coat (Taylor, 2009 ) Does packaging by a helper virus protect the genome and thereby allow for a larger viroid to exist?
In plants, viroids may not be able to become bigger possibly due to their sensitivity to degradation -but they cannot become much smaller either. Only a single viroid is known that is completely composed of protein-coding RNA with triplets (AbouHaidar et al., 2014). Viroids and related replicating RNAs are error-prone replicating units and the error frequency imposes a certain minimal size onto them, as they would otherwise become extinct. This mechanism has been described as "error catastrophe, " which prevents survival (Eigen, 1971 (Eigen, , 2013 . The viroids and related RNAs are the smallest known replicons. Smaller ones would become extinct in the absence of repair systems.
In summary, RNA can catalyze many reactions. Protein enzymes which may have evolved later have higher catalytic activities. Ribozymes are carriers of information, but do not require coding genes. Information is stored in their sequence and structure. Thus, replication of an initial RNA is followed by flow of information, from DNA to RNA to protein, as described the Central Dogma (Crick, 1968) . Even an information flow from protein to DNA has been described for some archaeal proteins (Béguin et al., 2015) . The DNA-protein world contains numerous ncRNAs with key functions. ncRNA may serve as a model compound for the origin of life on other planets. Hereby not the chemical composition of this molecule is of prime relevance, but its simplicity and multifunctionality. Furthermore, RNA is software and hardware in a single molecule, which makes it unique in our world. There are other scenarios besides the here discussed "virus-first, " such as "protein-first", "metabolism-fist" or the "lipid world" (Segré et al., 2001; Andras and Andras, 2005; Vasas et al., 2010; Moelling, 2012) . Some of these alternative concepts were built on phylogenomics, the reconstruction of the tree of life by genome sequencing (Delsuc et al., 2005) . Surprisingly, it was Sir Francis Crick, one of the discoverers of the DNA double-helix, who stated that he would not be surprised about a world completely built of RNA. A similar prediction was made by Walter Gilbert (Crick, 1968; Gilbert, 1986) . What a vision! Our world was almost 50 years later defined as "RNAprotein" world (Altman, 2013) . One can speculate our world was built of ribozymes or viroids, which means "viruses first."
ncRNAs appear as relics from the past RNA world, before DNA, the genetic code and proteins evolved. However, ncRNA is essential in our biological DNA world today. It is possible to produce such ncRNA today in the test tube by loss of genic information from protein-coding RNA. This reduction to ncRNA was demonstrated in vitro with phage RNA. Phage Qβ genomic RNA, 4,217 nucleotides in length, was incubated in the presence of Qβ replicase, free nucleotides and salts, a rich milieu in the test tube. The RNA was allowed to replicate by means of the Qβ replicase. Serial transfer of aliquots to fresh medium led to ever faster replication rates and reduction of genomic size, down to 218 nucleotides of ncRNA in 74 generations. This study demonstrated that, depending on environmental conditions, an extreme gene reduction can take place. This experiment performed in 1965 was designated as "Spiegelman's Monster." Coding RNA became replicating ncRNA (Spiegelman et al., 1965; Kacian et al., 1972) ! Manfred Eigen extended this experiment and demonstrated further that a mixture containing no RNA to start with but only ribonucleotides and the Qβ replicase can under the right conditions in a test tube spontaneously generate self-replicating ncRNA. This evolved into a form similar to Spiegelman's Monster. The presence of the replicase enzyme was still necessary in these studies. Furthermore, a change in enzyme concentration and addition of short RNAs or an RNA intercalator influenced the arising RNA population (Sumper and Luce, 1975; Eigen, 2013) . Thus, the complexity of genomes depends on the environment: poor conditions lead to increased complexity and rich environments to reduced complexity.
The process demonstrated in this experiment with viral components indicates that reversion to simplicity, reduction in size, loss of genetic information and speed in replication can be major forces of life, even though this appears to be like a reversion of evolution. The experiment can perhaps be generalized from the test tube to a principle, that the most successful survivors on our planet are the viruses and microorganisms, which became the most abundant entities. Perhaps life can start from there again.
These studies raise the question of how RNA molecules can become longer, if the small polymers become smaller and smaller, replicate faster and outcompete longer ones. This may be overcome by heat flow across an open pore in submerged rocks, which concentrates replicating oligonucleotides from a constant feeding flow and selection for longer strands. This has been described for an increase from 100 to 1,000 nucleotides in vitro. RNA molecules shorter than 75 nucleotides will die out (Kreysing et al., 2015) . Could a poor environment lead to an increase of complexity? This could be tested. Ribozymes were shown to grow in size by uptake of genes, as demonstrated for HDV (Taylor, 2009 ).
An interesting recent unexpected example supporting the notion that environmental conditions influence genetic complexity, is the human gut microbiome. Its complexity increases with diverse food, while uniform rich food reduces its diversity and may lead to diseases such as obesity. Colonization of the human intestinal tract starts at birth. A few dozen bacterial and viral/phage species are conserved between individuals (core sequences) as a stable composition (Broecker et al., 2016c . Dysbiosis has been observed in several chronic diseases and in obesity, a loss of bacterial richness and diversity. Nutrition under affluent conditions with sugar-rich food contributes to obesity, which results in a significant reduction of the complexity of the microbiome. This reduction is difficult to revert (Cotillard et al., 2013; Le Chatelier et al., 2013) . The gut microbiome in human patients with obesity is reminiscent of the gene reduction described in the Spiegelman's Monster experiment: reduction of genes in a rich environment.
The reduction of the complexity of the microbiome is in part attributed to the action of phages, which under such conditions, defined as stress, lyse the bacteria. Fecal microbiota transplantation can even be replaced by soluble fractions containing phages or metabolites from the donor without bacteria (Ott et al., 2017) . Analogously, the most highly complex microbiomes are found in indigenous human tribes in Africa, which live on a broad variety of different nutrients. It is a slow process, though, to increase gut microbiota complexity by diverse nutrition. The obesity-associated microbiota that survive are fitter and more difficult to counteract. Urbanization and westernization of the diet is associated with a loss of microbial biodiversity, loss of microbial organisms and genes (Segata, 2015) .
To understand the mechanism and driving force for genome reduction, deletion rates were tested by insertion of an indicator gene into the Salmonella enterica genome. The loss of the indicator gene was monitored by serial passage in rich medium. After 1,000 generations about 25% of the deletions caused increased bacterial fitness. Deletions resulted in smaller genomes with reduced or absence of DNA repair genes (Koskiniemi et al., 2012) . Gene loss conferred a higher fitness to the bacteria under these experimental conditions.
The recently discovered mimiviruses and other giant viruses are worth considering for understanding the evolution of life with respect to the contribution of viruses. Their hosts are, for example, Acanthamoeba, Chlorella, and Coccolithus algae (Emiliania huxleyi), but also corals or sponges as discussed more recently. Mimiviruses were first discovered in cooling water towers in Bradford, United Kingdom in 2003 with about 1,000 genes, most of which unrelated to previously known genes. Mimiviruses have received attention because they contain elements that were considered hallmarks of living cells, not of viruses, such as elements required for protein synthesis, tRNAs and amino acid transferases. The mimiviruses harbor these building blocks as incomplete sets not sufficient for independent protein synthesis as bacteria or archaea can perform, preventing them from leading an autonomous life (La Scola et al., 2003 Scola et al., , 2008 . They are larger than some bacteria. Giant viruses can be looked at as being on an evolutionary path toward a cellular organism. Alternatively, they may have evolved from a cellular organism by loss of genetic information (Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015) . Giant viruses have frequently taken up genes from their hosts by horizontal gene transfer (HGT) (La Scola et al., 2008; Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015; Colson et al., 2018) . A graph on genome sizes shows that mimiviruses and bacteria overlap in size, indicating a continuous transition between viruses and bacteria and between living and non-living worlds (based on Holmes, 2011) (Figure 3) . Other giant viruses, such as megaviruses, were discovered in the ocean of Chile with 1,120 genes. Most recently the Klosneuvirus was identified in the sewage of the monastery Klosterneuburg in Austria in 2017 with 1.57 million (mio) basepairs (Mitch, 2017) . Pithovirus sibericum is the largest among giant viruses discovered to date with a diameter of 1.5 microns, a genome of 470,000 bp with 467 putative genes, 1.6 microns in length, and it is presumably 30,000 years old as it was recovered from permafrost in Siberia (Legendre et al., 2014) . The smaller Pandoraviruses with 1 micron in length have five times larger genomes, 2,500,000 bp (Philippe et al., 2013) (Figure 3) .
The giant viruses can even be hosts to smaller viruses, the virophages, reminiscent of bacteriophages, the viruses of bacteria. These virophages such as Sputnik are only 50 nm in size with 18,343 bp of circular dsDNA and 21 predicted proteincoding genes. They replicate in viral factories and consume the resources of the mimivirus, thereby destroying it. Some, virophages can even integrate into the genome of the cellular host and can be reactivated when the host is infected by giant viruses. Thus, giant viruses suggest that viruses are close to living entities or may have been alive (La Scola et al., 2008; Fischer and Hackl, 2016) . In biology it is common to distinguish between living and dead matter by the ability to synthesize proteins and replicate autonomously. The giant viruses may be considered as missing link between the two, because they harbor "almost" the protein synthesis apparatus. The transition from living to the non-living world is continuous, not separated by a sharp borderline (Figure 3) .
Viruses are not considered alive by most of the scientific community and as written in textbooks, because they cannot replicate autonomously. Yet some of the giant viruses are equipped with almost all components of the protein synthesis machinery close to bacteria suggesting that they belong to the living matter (Schulz et al., 2017) . The ribozymes may have been the earliest replicating entity. Perhaps also other viruses were initially more independent of the early Earth than they are today. As described in Figure 1 there may have been initially no major difference between an early virus or an early cell. Only later viruses may have given up their autonomous replication and became parasites -as has been described for some bacteria (see below).
Efforts have been made to identify the smallest living cell that is still autonomously replicating. Among the presumably smallest naturally occurring bacteria is Pelagibacter ubique of the SAR11 clade of bacteria (Giovannoni, 2017) , which was discovered in 1990. It is an alpha-proteobacterium with 1,389 genes present ubiquitously in all oceans. It can reach up to 10 28 free living cells in total and represents about 25% of microbial plankton cells. Very little of its DNA is non-coding. It harbors podophage-type phages, designated as "pelagiphage" (Zhao et al., 2013) . This small bacterium was designated as the most common organism on the planet. Why is it so successful? This autonomous bacterium is smaller than some parasitic giant viruses. Craig Venter, who first succeeded in sequencing the human genome, tried to minimize the putative smallest genome of a living species, from Mycoplasma mycoides, a parasitic bacterium that lives in ruminants (Gibson et al., 2008 (Gibson et al., , 2010 . His group synthesized a genome of 531,000 bp with 473 genes, 149 of them (32%) with unknown functions (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Among the smallest parasitic living organisms is Nanoarchaeum equitans. It is a thermophile archaeon which lives at 80 • C and at pH 6 with 2% salt (Huber et al., 2003) . Its genome has a size of 490,000 bp and encodes 540 genes. N. equitans is an obligate symbiont of a bigger archaeon, Ignicoccus riding on it as on a horse, hence the name (Huber et al., 2003) .
The world of viruses covers a range of three logs in size of their genomes: from zero genes to about 2,500 genes amounting to about 2,500,000 bp of DNA. The zero-gene viroids are about 300 bases in length (Figure 3) .
The virosphere is the most successful reservoir of biological entities on our planet in terms of numbers of particles, speed of replication, growth rates, and sequence space. There are about 10 33 viruses on our planet and they are present in every single existing species (Suttle, 2005) .
There is no living species without viruses! Viruses also occur freely in the oceans, in the soil, in clouds up to the stratosphere and higher, to at least 300 km in altitude. They populate the human intestine, birth canal, and the outside of the body as protective layer against microbial populations. Microbes contain phages that are activated during stress conditions such as lack of nutrients, change in temperatures, lack of space and other changes of environmental conditions.
One of the most earth-shaking papers of this century was the publication of the human genome sequence (Lander et al., 2001) . About half, possibly even two-thirds of the sequence are composed of more or less complete endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) and related retroelements (REs) (de Koning et al., 2011) . REs amplify via copy-and-paste mechanisms involving a reverse transcriptase step from an RNA intermediate into DNA. In addition, DNA transposable elements (TEs) move by a cutand-paste mechanism. The origin of REs is being discussed as remnants of ancient retroviral germline infections that became evolutionarily fixed in the genome. About 450,000 human ERV (HERV) elements constitute about 8% of the human genome consisting of hallmark retroviral elements like the gag, pol, env genes and flanking long terminal repeats (LTR) that act as promoters (Lander et al., 2001) . Howard Temin, one of the discoverers of the reverse transcriptase, in 1985 already described endogenous retrovirus-like elements, which he estimated to about 10% of the human and mouse genome sequence (Temin, 1985) . The actual number is about 45% as estimated today (Lander et al., 2001) . In some genes such as the Protein Kinase Inhibitor B (PKIB) gene we determined about 70% retrovirusrelated sequences (Moelling and Broecker, 2015) . Is there a limit? Could it have been 100%? Retroviruses are estimated to have entered the lineage of the mammalian genome 550 million years ago (MYA) (Hayward, 2017) . Older ERV sequences may exist but are unrecognizable today due to the accumulation of mutations.
ERVs undergo mutations, deletions or homologous recombination events with large deletions and can become as short as solo LTR elements, which are a few hundred bp in length -the left-overs from full-length retroviral genomes of about 10,000 bp. The LTR promoters can deregulate neighboring genes. Homologous recombination events may be considered as gene loss or gene reduction events. It is the assumption that the ERVs, which were no longer needed for host cell defense, were no longer selected for by evolution and consequently deleted as unnecessary consumers of energy.
Eugene Koonin points out that infection and integration are unique events occurring at a fast pace, while loss and gene reduction may take much longer time frames (Wolf and Koonin, 2013) .
A frequent gene reduction of eukaryotic genomes is the loss of the viral envelope protein encoded by the env gene. Without a coat, retroviruses can no longer leave the cell and infect other cells. They lose mobility and become obligatory intracellular elements. Helper viruses can supply envelope proteins in trans and mobilize the viruses. TEs or REs can be regarded as examples of coat-free intracellular virus relics -or could it have been the other way round, perhaps precursors of full-length retroviruses?
These elements can be amplified intracellularly and modify the host genomes by integration with the potential danger of gene disruption and genetic changes. REs can lead to gene duplications and pseudogene development, with one copy for stable conservation of acquired functions and the other one for innovations (Cotton and Page, 2005) . Such duplications constitute large amounts of mammalian genomes (Zhang, 2003) . Retroviruses have an RNase H moiety duplication, one of which serves as a catalytically inactive linker between the RT polymerase and the enzymatically active RNase H (Xiong and Eickbush, 1990; Malik and Eickbush, 2001; Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) . This gene duplication dates back to 500 mio years (Cotton and Page, 2005) .
Gene duplications are a common cause of cancer, which often occurs only in the genome of the cancer cell itself, less affecting offsprings. Myc, Myb, ErbB2, Ras, and Raf are oncogenes amplified in diverse types of human cancers (Vogelstein and Kinzler, 2002) . The ability of retroviruses to integrate makes them distinct from endosymbionts which stay separate. Yet the net result is very similar, acquisition of new genetic information, which is transmitted to the next generation, if the germline is infected and endogenization of the virus occurred.
Viral integration is not limited to eukaryotic cells but also a mechanism in prokaryotes for maintenance of the lysogenic state of phages inside bacteria.
Also, for other eukaryotic viruses such as HBV, the envelope surface antigen BHsAg can be deleted, which leads to an obligatory intracellular life style for the virus, which especially in the presence of HCV promotes cancer (Yang et al., 2016) .
HIV has been shown to rapidly lose one of its auxiliary genes, nef, originally for negative factor. The gene was lost within a rather low number of passages of the virus grown under tissue culture conditions by selection for high virus titer producing cells. Deletion of nef resulted in a significant increase of the virus titer in culture -hence the name. The nef gene product was of no need inside tissue culture cells, rather it was inhibitory for replication. However, it is essential for pathogenicity in animals, and subsequently nef was reinterpreted as "necessary factor" (Flint, 2015) .
Also, the human hosts of HIV can lose a significant terminal portion of a seven transmembrane receptor in lymphocytes, the primary target cell for HIV entry and for virus uptake. This molecule, the CCR5 cytokine receptor is truncated by 32 carboxy-terminal amino acids (CCR5-32), disabling the receptor functionally. The allele frequency of the mutant CCR5-32 mutant is about 10% in the European population, making these people resistant to HIV infections (Solloch et al., 2017) . This gene loss in Europeans has been shown to make the individuals resistant not only against HIV infection but also against malaria. This may have been the selective pressure in the past before HIV/AIDS arose. No side effect for humans lacking this gene has been described (Galvani and Slatkin, 2003) .
Viruses have been proven to be drivers of evolution (Villarreal and Witzany, 2010) , including the human genome, which by at least 45% is composed of sequences related to retroviruses. In addition, endogenized retroviruses supplied the syncytin genes that are essential for the development of the mammalian placenta, and allowed the growth of embryos without its rejection by the maternal immune system (Dupressoir et al., 2012) . Thus, the same property which causes immunodeficiency in HIV-infected patients and leads to AIDS causes syncytia formation, cell fusion after infection by a retrovirus. Viruses have also been proposed to be at the origin of the evolution of adaptive immunity (Villarreal, 2009 ). Thus, viruses shaped genomes by supplying essential genes and mechanisms.
Endogenization of retroviruses has occurred in the mammalian genomes for at least 550 mio years (Hayward, 2017) . If the integrated ERVs did not provide any selective advantage, they deteriorated and accumulated mutations with loss of function. This was directly proven by reconstruction of an infectious retrovirus from the consensus sequence of 9 defective endogenous virus sequences, designated as Phoenix. The virus was expressed from a constructed synthetic DNA clone in cell culture and formed virus particles identified by high resolution microscopic analysis (Dewannieux and Heidmann, 2013) .
The koalas in Australia are currently undergoing endogenization of a retrovirus (koala retrovirus, KoRV) in "real time" and demonstrate possible consequences for immunity. In the early 1900s, some individuals were transferred to islands, including Kangaroo Island, close to the Australian mainland for repopulation purposes, as koalas were threatened to become extinct. Today, the majority of the koala population is infected by KoRV, which is closely related to the Gibbon ape leukemia virus (GALV). Yet, koalas isolated on Kangaroo Island are KoRV negative, which allows dating the introduction of KoRV into the koala population to about one hundred years ago. Many of the infected koalas fell ill and died, yet some populations became resistant within about 100 years, corresponding to about 10 generations. The koalas likely developed resistance due to the integrated DNA proviruses. The retrovirus is transmitted as exogenous as well as endogenous virus, similar to the Jaagsiekte sheep retrovirus (JSRV), whereby the endogenized viruses protect with a viral gene product, such as Env, against de novo infections by "superinfection exclusion" (Tarlinton, 2012) . The contribution of retroviruses to the antiviral defense is striking, since all retroviral genes have analogous genes in the siRNA/RNAi defense mechanism of eukaryotic cells (Moelling et al., 2006) .
Retroviruses can protect against infection by other related viruses, for example, by expressing Env proteins that block cellsurface receptors (Villarreal, 2011) . A comparable mechanism protects bacterial cells against DNA phages, by integrated phage DNA fragments that are transcribed into mRNA and hybridize to incoming new DNA phages and thereby lead to their destruction by hybrid-specific nucleases, CRISPR/Cas immunity (Charpentier and Doudna, 2013) . It is often not realized that immunity acquisition in bacteria and mammalian cells follow analogous mechanisms (Figure 4) .
Integration of retroviruses normally occurs in somatic cells after infection as an obligatory step during the viral life cycle. Infection of germline cells can lead to transmission to the next generation and ultimately result in inherited resistance. Endogenized retroviruses likely caused resistance FIGURE 4 | Viruses protect against viruses: retroviruses protect a cell against a new infection by a similar virus designated as "superinfection exclusion" or viral interference. This is mediated by viral gene products such as proteins or nucleic acids. Similarly, phages protect against phages: superinfection of bacteria is prevented by CRISPR/Cas RNA originating from previous infections. The mechanisms of defense against viruses and phages are analogous. Protection by viruses or phages against superinfections represents cellular defense and acquired immunity. The four examples are discussed in the text.
to the exogenous counterparts. Similarly, resistance to Simian Immune Deficiency virus (SIV) in some monkey species may be explained by endogenization (Li et al., 2017 (Li et al., , 2018 . In the case of phages and their prokaryotic hosts the mechanism is described as CRISPR/Cas, which follow analogous principles of "endogenization" of incoming genetic material for subsequent exclusion.
One may speculate that HIV may also eventually become endogenized into the human genome. There is some evidence that HIV can infect human germline cells and can be transmitted to the embryonic genome (Wang et al., 2011) . How long this may take is not known -10 generations?
The loss of function of ERVs can occur by mutations, deletions of the env or other genes and ultimately all coding genes by homologous recombination, leaving behind only one LTR. The number of retrovirus-like elements add up to about 450,000, corresponding to 8% of the human genome (Lander et al., 2001; Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). The promoter regions were analyzed for their contribution to cancer by activating neighboring genes -as a consequence of a former retrovirus infection. Indeed, activated cellular genes by "downstream promotion" were identified in animal studies with activation of the myc gene as one of many examples, leading to chronic, not acute development of cancer (Ott et al., 2013) . As a general mechanism for human cancer today the LTRs are, however, not identified as a major culprit. Most of the ERVs we find today have been integrated during evolution in introns or other regions where their presence is relatively harmless. Did the other ones result in death of the carriers which disappeared? The effects of LTRs on the expression levels of neighboring host genes was studied with the endogenous human virus, HERV-K, as a possible cause of cancer, but this appears not to be a general phenomenon (Broecker et al., 2016b) . As shown for the koalas, ERVs can confer immunity to viral infections (Feschotte and Gilbert, 2012) .
A related ERV, HERV-H, was shown to produce an RNA that keeps early embryonic cells pluripotent and even revert adult cells to regain pluripotency (Grow et al., 2015) . Thus, the role of ERVs may be more complex than we presently know.
Transposable elements and REs that lost the ability of cellular transmission by deletion of the coat protein majorly contribute to genetic complexity of host cells. They are "locked" inside the cells and are major drivers of the increase of genetic complexity (Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). One could speculate that these intracellular elements are replicationincompetent retroviruses lacking coats (Lander et al., 2001) . Bats transmit viruses such as Ebola and SARS coronavirus without suffering from disease (Beltz, 2018) . Even RNA viruses such as Bornaviruses have been shown to integrate by illegitimate reverse transcription, possibly also supplying immunity against superinfection (Katzourakis and Gifford, 2010) .
There are two prominent events that significantly contributed to the success of life and the formation of cells. Both of them are associated with gene reduction. This phenomenon may play a role for the evolution of viruses from autonomous to parasitic lifestyles. In the 1960s Lynn Margulis proposed an extracellular origin for mitochondria (Margulis, 1970 (Margulis, , 1993 ). An ancestral cell, perhaps an archaeon, was infected by an anaerobic bacterium, which gave rise to mitochondria. Similarly, cyanobacteria formed the chloroplasts in modern plant cells. Mitochondria arose around 1.45 billion years ago (BYA) (Embley and Martin, 2006) . Mitochondria and chloroplasts are the most striking examples for a change in lifestyle from autonomous bacteria to endosymbionts. This transition is often considered as extremely rare and a hallmark of evolution of life on our planet. However, there are many other obligate intracellular parasites such as Rickettsia, Chlamydia trachomatis, Coxiella burnetii (the causative agent of Q fever), Mycobacterium leprae, M. tuberculosis, and M. mycoides (Beare et al., 2006) .
The change of lifestyle of the endosymbionts in the two cases of mitochondria and chloroplasts is striking. Both of them drastically reduced their genetic make-up. Mitochondria contain less than 37 genes, left from the original about 3,000 genes. Is endogenization of retroviruses, the ERVs, which are integrated into germline cells, related to endosymbiosis? Are these endosymbionts models for the transition from autonomous lifestyle to a parasitic life-which may have taken place with viruses? A more recent typical example for a reductive evolution are Rickettsia. These bacteria were assumed for some time to be viruses because of their obligatory intracellular parasitic existence. Rickettsia have evolved from autonomously replicating bacteria. Reductive evolution of endosymbionts can yield bacteria with tiny genomes on the expense of autonomous extracellular life. Their genomes are 1.11 mio bp in length with about 834 protein-coding genes, and loss of 24% by reductive evolution (Ogata et al., 2001) . Rickettsia may have some relationship with cyanobacteria, which are considered as the major symbionts.
Can one speculate that viruses may have been autonomous entities initially? Viroids may have undergone transition from autonomy to parasites, just as shown for mitochondria, chloroplasts or Rickettsia? To which extent have viruses been autonomous and independent of cellular metabolisms originally -and contributed to the origin of cells? Could they only later have lost their autonomy and become parasitic?
Viruses are minimalistic in their composition and must have undergone stringent gene reductions (Flint, 2015) . How small can their genomes become? Most coding RNA viruses still contain regulatory elements, ncRNA at the 3 and 5 terminal regions for ribosomal entry, protein synthesis, transcriptional regulation, and others.
A subgroup of retroviruses is an interesting example in respect to simultaneous loss and gain of genetic information. The oncogenic retroviruses or tumorviruses can recombine with cellular genes which under the promoters of retroviruses can become oncogenes and drivers of cancer. About a hundred oncogenes have been selected for in the laboratories and studied over decades for understanding the molecular mechanisms of cancer. Selection for growth advantages of the host cells led to the discovery of the fastest growth-promoting oncogenes we know today, such as Ras, Raf, ErbB or Myc, which are in part successful targets for anticancer drugs (Moelling et al., 1984) .
These oncogenes were in most cases taken up by the retroviruses at the expense of structural (gag), replicating (pol) or envelope (env) genes, and are often expressed as fusion proteins with Gag. Thus, oncogenic retroviruses are obligatory intracellular defective viruses and were selected for in the laboratory by researchers for the oncogenes with the most potent growth promoting ability. They need the supply of replicatory genes in trans from co-infecting helper viruses to infect other cells (Flint, 2015) . Retroviruses are able to pick up cellular genes, transfer and integrate them into neighboring cells. Some strains of Rous sarcoma virus maintain replication competent when carrying the cell-derived src (for sarcoma) oncogene encoding a protein of 536 amino acids that apparently can fit into the retroviral particle along with the full-size viral genome (Broecker et al., 2016a) . Spatial reasons may have influenced the formation of oncogenic retroviruses and limited their size and thereby led to their defective phenotypes.
There are indications that the uncontrolled activity of (retro)transposons in germline cells can result in diseases such as male infertility -presumably by "error catastrophe, " caused by too many transposition events. In mammals, piRNAs tame transposon activity by means of the RNase H activity of PIWI proteins during spermatogenesis (Girard et al., 2006) .
Only a minority of viruses are pathogens; most of them do not cause diseases. On the contrary, they are most important as drivers of evolution, as transmitters of genetic material, as innovative agents. In particular, the RNA viruses are the most innovative ones. Some of them are pathogenic and dangerous, such as HIV or influenza virus, or viroids in plants. RNA viruses are able to change so rapidly that the host immune system is unable to counteract the infection. Pathogenicity arises when environmental conditions change, for instance, when a virus enters a new organism or species.
Increase of cellular complexity by viruses is an important feature of evolution. Such major evolutionary changes are recently taken as arguments against the evolutionary theory by Charles Darwin who considered gradual changes, small increments by mutations as the main basis for selection and evolution. New criticism is addressing this thinking, considering larger changes as evolutionary drivers. Such changes arise by many complex phenomena such as endosymbiosis, infection by prokaryotes, viruses and fungi, recombination of genes, HGT, infections, sex. Dramatic changes such as endosymbiosis or pathogen infections extend Darwin's concept of evolution.
There are numerous examples for the contribution of viruses to the evolution of life since at least as long as 550 MYA (Hayward, 2017) . But genetic noise through random mutations does not allow us to go back to the origin of life. It may not be impossible that the earliest compartment was indistinguishable, either a pre-cell or a pre-virus. By analogy one may speculate that at some point autonomous viruses gave up independence for an obligatory intracellular life -as has been described for mitochondria and chloroplasts but also intracellular bacteria such as Rickettsia. This speculation is based on the concept that early life must have started simple and with high genetic variability and then became more complex. But complexity can be given up for a less energy consuming lifestyle with small genomes and high speed of replication (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . Therefore, the question may be repeated: "Are viruses our oldest ancestors?" Some fossil life can be partially reproduced in vitro by Spiegelman's Monster and Eigen's follow-up experiments, explaining the great surviving potential of simple ncRNA.
Viruses can be pathogens, but their recognition as primarily causing diseases is wrong. This notion is based on the history of viruses in medicine, as explained in a book entitled "Viruses: More Friends Than Foes" (Moelling, 2017) . The scenario described here focuses on viruses as drivers of evolution.
The early RNA world gained interest 20-30 years ago as evidenced by the references provided above. Surprisingly, there are scientists who still believe in the "pansperm hypothesis" and think that retroviruses are of extraterrestric origin (Steele et al., 2018) . The recent interest in the origin of life arose from the newly discovered exoplanets whose number increases daily -and which may be as numerous as 10 25 . Thus, pure statistics make some people believe that there is extraterrestrial life.
The extraterrestric life is mimicked in laboratories on Earth with many assumptions -perhaps this overview stimulates some thinking. The discussion presented here should be taken as concept about simple replicating and evolving entities possibly arising from different building blocks in other environments, with structure being more relevant than sequence. | What contributed to a large part of mammalian genomic sequence? | 1,176 | Retroviruses | 731 |
1,690 | Viruses and Evolution – Viruses First? A Personal Perspective
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433886/
SHA: f3b9fc0f8e0a431366196d3e835e1ec368b379d1
Authors: Moelling, Karin; Broecker, Felix
Date: 2019-03-19
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00523
License: cc-by
Abstract: The discovery of exoplanets within putative habitable zones revolutionized astrobiology in recent years. It stimulated interest in the question about the origin of life and its evolution. Here, we discuss what the roles of viruses might have been at the beginning of life and during evolution. Viruses are the most abundant biological entities on Earth. They are present everywhere, in our surrounding, the oceans, the soil and in every living being. Retroviruses contributed to about half of our genomic sequences and to the evolution of the mammalian placenta. Contemporary viruses reflect evolution ranging from the RNA world to the DNA-protein world. How far back can we trace their contribution? Earliest replicating and evolving entities are the ribozymes or viroids fulfilling several criteria of life. RNA can perform many aspects of life and influences our gene expression until today. The simplest structures with non-protein-coding information may represent models of life built on structural, not genetic information. Viruses today are obligatory parasites depending on host cells. Examples of how an independent lifestyle might have been lost include mitochondria, chloroplasts, Rickettsia and others, which used to be autonomous bacteria and became intracellular parasites or endosymbionts, thereby losing most of their genes. Even in vitro the loss of genes can be recapitulated all the way from coding to non-coding RNA. Furthermore, the giant viruses may indicate that there is no sharp border between living and non-living entities but an evolutionary continuum. Here, it is discussed how viruses can lose and gain genes, and that they are essential drivers of evolution. This discussion may stimulate the thinking about viruses as early possible forms of life. Apart from our view “viruses first”, there are others such as “proteins first” and “metabolism first.”
Text: Mycoplasma mycoides by systematic deletion of individual genes resulted in a synthetic minimal genome of 473 genes (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Can one consider simpler living entities?
There are elements with zero genes that fulfill many criteria for early life: ribozymes, catalytic RNAs closely related to viroids. They were recovered in vitro from 10 15 molecules (aptamers), 220 nucleotides in length, by 10 rounds of selection. Among the many RNA species present in this collection of quasispecies RNAs were catalytically active members, enzymatically active ribozymes. The sequence space for 220-mer RNAs is about 3 × 10 132 (Eigen, 1971; Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Brackett and Dieckmann, 2006) .
The selected ribozymes were able to replicate, cleave, join, and form peptide bonds. They can polymerize progeny chemically, allow for mutations to occur and can evolve. One molecule serves as catalyst, the other one as substrate. Replication of ribozymes was demonstrated in the test tube (Lincoln and Joyce, 2009) . Ribozymes can form peptide bonds between amino acids (Zhang and Cech, 1997) . Thus, small peptides were available by ribozyme activity. Consequently, an RNA modification has been proposed as peptide nucleic acid (PNA), with more stable peptide bonds instead of phosphodiester bonds (Zhang and Cech, 1997; Joyce, 2002) . Replication of RNA molecules can be performed chemically from RNA without polymerase enzymes. In addition, deoxyribozymes can form from ribonucleotides (Wilson and Szostak, 1999) . Thus, DNA can arise from RNA chemically, without the key protein enzyme, the reverse transcriptase.
An entire living world is possible from non-coding RNA (ncRNA) before evolution of the genetic code and protein enzymes. Ribozymes naturally consist of circular single-stranded RNAs (Orgel, 2004) . They lack the genetic triplet code and do not encode proteins. Instead, they exhibit structural information by hairpin-loops that form hydrogen bonds between incomplete double strands, and loops free to interact with other molecules. They represent a quasispecies in which many species of RNA may form, such as ribozymes, tRNA-like molecules, and other ncRNAs. RNAs within such a pool can bind amino acids. Ninety different amino acids have been identified on the Murchison meteorite found in Australia, while on Earth only about 20 of them are used for protein synthesis (Meierhenrich, 2008) . Where formation of ribozymes occurred on the early Earth is a matter of speculation. The hydrothermal vents such as black smokers in the deep ocean are possibilities where life may have started (Martin et al., 2008) . There, temperature gradients and clay containing minerals such as magnesium or manganese are available. Pores or niches offer possibilities for concentration of building blocks, which is required for chemical reactions to occur. Interestingly, also ice is a candidate for ribozyme formation and chemical reactions. Ice crystals displace the biomolecules into the liquid phase, which leads to concentration, creating a quasicellular compartmentalization where de novo synthesis of nucleotide precursors is promoted. There, RNA and ribozymes can emerge, which are capable of self-replication (Attwater et al., 2010) .
tRNA-amino acid complexes can find RNAs as "mRNAs." Such interactions could have contributed to the evolution of the genetic code. This sequence of events can lead to primitive ribosome precursors. Ribozymes are the essential catalytic elements in ribosomes: "The ribosome is a ribozyme" (Cech, 2000) , supplemented with about a hundred scaffold proteins later during evolution. The proteins have structural functions and contribute indirectly to enzymatic activity. Are these ribosomebound ribozymes fossils from the early Earth? Small peptides can be formed by ribozymes before ribosomes evolved, whereby single or dimeric amino acids may originate from the universe (Meierhenrich, 2008) .
Small peptides with basic amino acids can increase the catalytic activity of ribozymes as shown in vitro (Müller et al., 1994) . Such proteins are known as RNA-binding proteins from RNA viruses that protect the RNA genome, with motifs such as RAPRKKG of the nucleocapsid NCp7 of HIV (Schmalzbauer et al., 1996) . Peptides can enhance the catalytic activity of ribozymes up to a 100-fold (Müller et al., 1994) . Such peptides of RNA viruses serve as chaperones that remove higher ordered RNA structures, allowing for more efficient interaction of RNA molecules and increasing transcription rates of RNA polymerases (Müller et al., 1994) . Ribonucleoproteins may have also been functionally important during the evolution of ribosomes (Harish and Caetano-Anolles, 2012) .
These pre-ribosomal structures are also similar to precursorlike structures of retroviruses. Reverse transcription can be performed by ribozymes chemically. This action does not necessarily require a protein polymerase such as the reverse transcriptase. Similarly, deoxyribonucleotides can arise by removal of an oxygen without the need of a protein enzyme (a reductase) as today, and allow for DNA polymerization (Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Joyce, 2002) . The same elements of the precursors for ribosomes are also building blocks of retroviruses, which may have a similar evolutionary origin (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . tRNAs serve as primers for the reverse transcriptase, and the sequence of promoters of transposable elements are derived from tRNAs (Lander et al., 2001) . The ribozymes developed into more complex self-cleaving group II introns with insertion of genes encoding a reverse transcriptase and additional proteins (Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) (Figure 1) .
It came as a surprise that the genomes of almost all species are rich in ncDNA, transcribed into ncRNAs but not encoding proteins, as evidenced, for instance, by the "Encyclopedia of DNA Elements" (ENCODE) project. ncDNA amounts to more than 98% of the human DNA genome (Deveson et al., 2017) . Higher organisms tend to have more non-coding information, which allows for more complex modes of gene regulation. The ncRNAs are regulators of the protein-coding sequences. Highly complex organisms such as humans typically have a high number of ncRNA and regulatory mechanisms. ncRNA can range from close to zero in the smallest bacteria such as Pelagibacter ubique to about 98% in the human genome.
RNA viruses such as the retrovirus HIV harbor ncRNAs for gene regulation such as the trans-activating response element (TAR), the binding site for the Tat protein for early viral gene expression. Tat has a highly basic domain comprising mostly Lys and Arg residues, resembling other RNA binding proteins. ncRNA also serves on viral RNA genomes as ribosomal entry sites, primer binding sites or packaging signals. DNA synthesis depends on RNA synthesis as initial event, with RNA primers as starters for DNA replication, inside of cells as FIGURE 1 | A compartment is shown with essential components of life as discussed in the text. Non-coding RNA (ncRNA), ribozymes or viroids, can perform many steps for life without protein-coding genes but only by structural information. Individual amino acids are indicated as black dots and may be available on Earth from the universe. DNA may have existed before retroviruses. The compartment can be interpreted as pre-virus or pre-cell. Viroid, green; RNA, red; DNA, black.
well as during retroviral replication, proving a requirement of RNA (Flint, 2015) .
The number of mammalian protein-coding genes is about 20,000. Surprisingly, this is only a fifth of the number of genes of bread wheat (Appels et al., 2018) . Tulips, maize and other plants also have larger genomes, indicating that the number of genes does not necessarily reflect the complexity of an organism. What makes these plant genomes so large, is still an open question. Could the giant genomes possibly be the result to breeding of plants by farmers or gardeners?
According to Szostak there are molecules which appear like relics from the RNA world such as acetyl-CoA or vitamin B12, both of which are bound to a ribonucleotide for no obvious reason -was it "forgotten" to be removed? (Roberts and Szostak, 1997; Szostak et al., 2001; Szostak, 2011) . Perhaps the connected RNA serves as structural stabilizer. Lipid vesicles could have formed the first compartments and enclosed ribozymes, tRNAs with selected amino acids, and RNA which became mRNA. Is this a pre-cell or pre-virus (Figure 1) ? Patel et al. (2015) demonstrated that the building blocks of life, ribonucleotides, lipids and amino acids, can be formed from C, H, O, P, N, S in a "one pot" synthesis. This study can be regarded as a follow-up study of the classical Urey-Miller in vitro synthesis of biomolecules (Miller, 1953; Miller and Urey, 1959) . Transition from the RNA to the DNA world was promoted by the formation of the reverse transcriptase. The enzyme was first described in retroviruses but it is almost ubiquitous and found in numerous cellular species, many of which with unknown functions (Simon and Zimmerly, 2008; Lescot et al., 2016) . It is an important link between the RNA and the DNA worlds. The name reverse transcriptase is historical and irritating because it is the "real" transcriptase during the transition from the RNA to the DNA world. Similarly, the ribonuclease H (RNase H) is an essential enzyme of retroviruses (Mölling et al., 1971) . The RNase H turned out to be one of the five most frequent and ancient proteins (Ma et al., 2008 ) that belongs to a superfamily of more than sixty different unique representatives and 152 families with numerous functions (Majorek et al., 2014) .
Some of the many tRNAs can become loaded with amino acids. There are viruses containing tRNA-like structures (TLS), resembling these early RNAs (Dreher, 2009) . The TLS of these viruses typically bind to a single amino acid. TLS-viruses include plant viruses, such as Turnip yellow mosaic virus, in Peanut clump virus, Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), and Brome mosaic virus. Only half a tRNA is found in Narnaviruses of fungi. The amino acids known to be components of tRNA-like viruses are valine, histidine and tyrosine. The structures were also designated as "mimicry, " enhancing translation (Dreher, 2009 (Dreher, , 2010 . They look like "frozen" precursor-like elements for protein synthesis. This combination of a partial tRNA linked to one amino acid can be interpreted as an evolutionary early step toward protein synthesis, trapped in a viral element.
Ribozymes are related to the protein-free viroids. Viroids are virus-like elements that belong to the virosphere, the world of viruses (Chela-Flores, 1994) . Viroids lack protein coats and therefore were initially not designated as viruses but virus-like viroids when they were discovered in 1971 by Theodor Diener. He described viroids as "living fossils" (Diener, 2016) (Figure 2) .
From infected potatoes, Diener isolated the Potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd) whose genome was about a 100-fold smaller than those of viruses known at that time. The viroids known today are ranging from 246 to 467 nucleotides. They contain circular single-stranded RNA, are protein-free and self-replicating with no genetic information, but only structural FIGURE 2 | Viroids are hairpin-loop structures and are shown schematically and as electron micrograph. Viroids are, like ribozymes, without genetic information and play major biological roles today in plant diseases, in carnation flowers, in liver cancer, as catalyst of protein synthesis in ribosomes and as circular regulatory RNAs, as "sponges" for other regulatory RNAs.
information in the form of hairpin-loops (Riesner et al., 1979) . They can generate copies of themselves in the appropriate environment. They were designated as the "frontiers of life" (Flores et al., 2014) .
The knowledge of virus composition was based on TMV and its crystallization by Wendell Stanley in 1935 (Pennazio and Roggero, 2000) . The genome of TMV is protein-coding singlestranded RNA of about 6,400 nucleotides that is enclosed by a rod-like protein coat. Viroids, in contrast, do not encode proteins and lack coats but they are closely related to viruses. Viroids can lose their autonomy and rely on host RNA polymerases to replicate, are capable of infecting plants and many are economically important pathogens. There are two families, the nucleus-replicating Pospiviroidae such as PSTVd and the chloroplast-replicating Avsunviroidae like the Avocado sunblotch viroid (ASBVd). Their replication requires host enzymes. Thus, autonomy is replaced by dependence on host enzymes and an intracellular lifestyle.
Most viroids are often enzymatically active ribozymes -yet they are examples that this trait can get lost as a result of changing environmental conditions. Loss of ribozyme activity is a functional, not a genetic loss. Only the nuclear variants, the Pospiviroidae, can lose their ribozyme activity and use the cellular RNase III enzyme for their replication. In contrast, the Avsunviroidae are still active hammerhead ribozymes. Thus, inside the nucleus of a host cell, the enzymatic RNA function can become unnecessary. Not genes, but a function, the catalytic activity, gets lost.
Viroids did apparently not gain genes but cooperated for a more complex lifestyle. For example, Carnation small viroid-like RNA (CarSV RNA) cooperates with a retrovirus and is accompanied by a homologous DNA generated by a reverse transcriptase. This enzyme presumably originates from a pararetrovirus of plants. Pararetroviruses package virus particles at a different stage during replication than retroviruses, the DNA, not the RNA. This unique combination between two viral elements has so far only been detected with CarSV in carnation flowers (Flores et al., 2005 (Flores et al., , 2014 . Why did such a cooperation evolve -perhaps by breeding gardeners? RNA is sensitive to degradation; therefore, genetic increase and growth of the genome may not be favorable energetically -at least not in plants. Gain of function is, in this case, cooperation.
The circular RNA (circRNA) is related to ribozymes/viroids as a chief regulator of other regulatory RNAs, a "sponge" absorbing small RNAs. Micro RNAs (miRNAs) are post-transcriptional regulators that are affected by the presence of circRNAs. circRNAs were detected in human and mouse brains and testes as well as in plants. They can bind 70 conserved miRNAs in a cell and amount up to 25,000 molecules (Hansen et al., 2013) . Their structure is reminiscent of catalytically active ribozymes.
There is an exceptional viroid that gained coding information and entered the human liver (Taylor, 2009) . The viroid is known as hepatitis delta virus (HDV). It has the smallest genome of any known animal virus of about 1,680 nucleotides. It has properties typical of viroids, since it contains circRNA, forms similar hairpin-loops and replicates in the nucleus using host enzymes. Two polymerases have to redirect their specificity from DNA to RNA to generate the HDV genome and antigenome. Both of them have ribozyme activity. In contrast to other ribozymes, HDV encodes a protein, the hepatitis delta antigen (HDVAg) that occurs in two forms, the small-HDVAg (24 kDa) supporting replication and the large-HDVAg (27 kDa) that helps virion assembly. The gene was presumably picked up from the host cell by recombination of HDV's mRNA intermediate with a host mRNA. Transmission depends on a helper virus, the Hepatitis B virus (HBV), which delivers the coat (Taylor, 2009 ) Does packaging by a helper virus protect the genome and thereby allow for a larger viroid to exist?
In plants, viroids may not be able to become bigger possibly due to their sensitivity to degradation -but they cannot become much smaller either. Only a single viroid is known that is completely composed of protein-coding RNA with triplets (AbouHaidar et al., 2014). Viroids and related replicating RNAs are error-prone replicating units and the error frequency imposes a certain minimal size onto them, as they would otherwise become extinct. This mechanism has been described as "error catastrophe, " which prevents survival (Eigen, 1971 (Eigen, , 2013 . The viroids and related RNAs are the smallest known replicons. Smaller ones would become extinct in the absence of repair systems.
In summary, RNA can catalyze many reactions. Protein enzymes which may have evolved later have higher catalytic activities. Ribozymes are carriers of information, but do not require coding genes. Information is stored in their sequence and structure. Thus, replication of an initial RNA is followed by flow of information, from DNA to RNA to protein, as described the Central Dogma (Crick, 1968) . Even an information flow from protein to DNA has been described for some archaeal proteins (Béguin et al., 2015) . The DNA-protein world contains numerous ncRNAs with key functions. ncRNA may serve as a model compound for the origin of life on other planets. Hereby not the chemical composition of this molecule is of prime relevance, but its simplicity and multifunctionality. Furthermore, RNA is software and hardware in a single molecule, which makes it unique in our world. There are other scenarios besides the here discussed "virus-first, " such as "protein-first", "metabolism-fist" or the "lipid world" (Segré et al., 2001; Andras and Andras, 2005; Vasas et al., 2010; Moelling, 2012) . Some of these alternative concepts were built on phylogenomics, the reconstruction of the tree of life by genome sequencing (Delsuc et al., 2005) . Surprisingly, it was Sir Francis Crick, one of the discoverers of the DNA double-helix, who stated that he would not be surprised about a world completely built of RNA. A similar prediction was made by Walter Gilbert (Crick, 1968; Gilbert, 1986) . What a vision! Our world was almost 50 years later defined as "RNAprotein" world (Altman, 2013) . One can speculate our world was built of ribozymes or viroids, which means "viruses first."
ncRNAs appear as relics from the past RNA world, before DNA, the genetic code and proteins evolved. However, ncRNA is essential in our biological DNA world today. It is possible to produce such ncRNA today in the test tube by loss of genic information from protein-coding RNA. This reduction to ncRNA was demonstrated in vitro with phage RNA. Phage Qβ genomic RNA, 4,217 nucleotides in length, was incubated in the presence of Qβ replicase, free nucleotides and salts, a rich milieu in the test tube. The RNA was allowed to replicate by means of the Qβ replicase. Serial transfer of aliquots to fresh medium led to ever faster replication rates and reduction of genomic size, down to 218 nucleotides of ncRNA in 74 generations. This study demonstrated that, depending on environmental conditions, an extreme gene reduction can take place. This experiment performed in 1965 was designated as "Spiegelman's Monster." Coding RNA became replicating ncRNA (Spiegelman et al., 1965; Kacian et al., 1972) ! Manfred Eigen extended this experiment and demonstrated further that a mixture containing no RNA to start with but only ribonucleotides and the Qβ replicase can under the right conditions in a test tube spontaneously generate self-replicating ncRNA. This evolved into a form similar to Spiegelman's Monster. The presence of the replicase enzyme was still necessary in these studies. Furthermore, a change in enzyme concentration and addition of short RNAs or an RNA intercalator influenced the arising RNA population (Sumper and Luce, 1975; Eigen, 2013) . Thus, the complexity of genomes depends on the environment: poor conditions lead to increased complexity and rich environments to reduced complexity.
The process demonstrated in this experiment with viral components indicates that reversion to simplicity, reduction in size, loss of genetic information and speed in replication can be major forces of life, even though this appears to be like a reversion of evolution. The experiment can perhaps be generalized from the test tube to a principle, that the most successful survivors on our planet are the viruses and microorganisms, which became the most abundant entities. Perhaps life can start from there again.
These studies raise the question of how RNA molecules can become longer, if the small polymers become smaller and smaller, replicate faster and outcompete longer ones. This may be overcome by heat flow across an open pore in submerged rocks, which concentrates replicating oligonucleotides from a constant feeding flow and selection for longer strands. This has been described for an increase from 100 to 1,000 nucleotides in vitro. RNA molecules shorter than 75 nucleotides will die out (Kreysing et al., 2015) . Could a poor environment lead to an increase of complexity? This could be tested. Ribozymes were shown to grow in size by uptake of genes, as demonstrated for HDV (Taylor, 2009 ).
An interesting recent unexpected example supporting the notion that environmental conditions influence genetic complexity, is the human gut microbiome. Its complexity increases with diverse food, while uniform rich food reduces its diversity and may lead to diseases such as obesity. Colonization of the human intestinal tract starts at birth. A few dozen bacterial and viral/phage species are conserved between individuals (core sequences) as a stable composition (Broecker et al., 2016c . Dysbiosis has been observed in several chronic diseases and in obesity, a loss of bacterial richness and diversity. Nutrition under affluent conditions with sugar-rich food contributes to obesity, which results in a significant reduction of the complexity of the microbiome. This reduction is difficult to revert (Cotillard et al., 2013; Le Chatelier et al., 2013) . The gut microbiome in human patients with obesity is reminiscent of the gene reduction described in the Spiegelman's Monster experiment: reduction of genes in a rich environment.
The reduction of the complexity of the microbiome is in part attributed to the action of phages, which under such conditions, defined as stress, lyse the bacteria. Fecal microbiota transplantation can even be replaced by soluble fractions containing phages or metabolites from the donor without bacteria (Ott et al., 2017) . Analogously, the most highly complex microbiomes are found in indigenous human tribes in Africa, which live on a broad variety of different nutrients. It is a slow process, though, to increase gut microbiota complexity by diverse nutrition. The obesity-associated microbiota that survive are fitter and more difficult to counteract. Urbanization and westernization of the diet is associated with a loss of microbial biodiversity, loss of microbial organisms and genes (Segata, 2015) .
To understand the mechanism and driving force for genome reduction, deletion rates were tested by insertion of an indicator gene into the Salmonella enterica genome. The loss of the indicator gene was monitored by serial passage in rich medium. After 1,000 generations about 25% of the deletions caused increased bacterial fitness. Deletions resulted in smaller genomes with reduced or absence of DNA repair genes (Koskiniemi et al., 2012) . Gene loss conferred a higher fitness to the bacteria under these experimental conditions.
The recently discovered mimiviruses and other giant viruses are worth considering for understanding the evolution of life with respect to the contribution of viruses. Their hosts are, for example, Acanthamoeba, Chlorella, and Coccolithus algae (Emiliania huxleyi), but also corals or sponges as discussed more recently. Mimiviruses were first discovered in cooling water towers in Bradford, United Kingdom in 2003 with about 1,000 genes, most of which unrelated to previously known genes. Mimiviruses have received attention because they contain elements that were considered hallmarks of living cells, not of viruses, such as elements required for protein synthesis, tRNAs and amino acid transferases. The mimiviruses harbor these building blocks as incomplete sets not sufficient for independent protein synthesis as bacteria or archaea can perform, preventing them from leading an autonomous life (La Scola et al., 2003 Scola et al., , 2008 . They are larger than some bacteria. Giant viruses can be looked at as being on an evolutionary path toward a cellular organism. Alternatively, they may have evolved from a cellular organism by loss of genetic information (Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015) . Giant viruses have frequently taken up genes from their hosts by horizontal gene transfer (HGT) (La Scola et al., 2008; Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015; Colson et al., 2018) . A graph on genome sizes shows that mimiviruses and bacteria overlap in size, indicating a continuous transition between viruses and bacteria and between living and non-living worlds (based on Holmes, 2011) (Figure 3) . Other giant viruses, such as megaviruses, were discovered in the ocean of Chile with 1,120 genes. Most recently the Klosneuvirus was identified in the sewage of the monastery Klosterneuburg in Austria in 2017 with 1.57 million (mio) basepairs (Mitch, 2017) . Pithovirus sibericum is the largest among giant viruses discovered to date with a diameter of 1.5 microns, a genome of 470,000 bp with 467 putative genes, 1.6 microns in length, and it is presumably 30,000 years old as it was recovered from permafrost in Siberia (Legendre et al., 2014) . The smaller Pandoraviruses with 1 micron in length have five times larger genomes, 2,500,000 bp (Philippe et al., 2013) (Figure 3) .
The giant viruses can even be hosts to smaller viruses, the virophages, reminiscent of bacteriophages, the viruses of bacteria. These virophages such as Sputnik are only 50 nm in size with 18,343 bp of circular dsDNA and 21 predicted proteincoding genes. They replicate in viral factories and consume the resources of the mimivirus, thereby destroying it. Some, virophages can even integrate into the genome of the cellular host and can be reactivated when the host is infected by giant viruses. Thus, giant viruses suggest that viruses are close to living entities or may have been alive (La Scola et al., 2008; Fischer and Hackl, 2016) . In biology it is common to distinguish between living and dead matter by the ability to synthesize proteins and replicate autonomously. The giant viruses may be considered as missing link between the two, because they harbor "almost" the protein synthesis apparatus. The transition from living to the non-living world is continuous, not separated by a sharp borderline (Figure 3) .
Viruses are not considered alive by most of the scientific community and as written in textbooks, because they cannot replicate autonomously. Yet some of the giant viruses are equipped with almost all components of the protein synthesis machinery close to bacteria suggesting that they belong to the living matter (Schulz et al., 2017) . The ribozymes may have been the earliest replicating entity. Perhaps also other viruses were initially more independent of the early Earth than they are today. As described in Figure 1 there may have been initially no major difference between an early virus or an early cell. Only later viruses may have given up their autonomous replication and became parasites -as has been described for some bacteria (see below).
Efforts have been made to identify the smallest living cell that is still autonomously replicating. Among the presumably smallest naturally occurring bacteria is Pelagibacter ubique of the SAR11 clade of bacteria (Giovannoni, 2017) , which was discovered in 1990. It is an alpha-proteobacterium with 1,389 genes present ubiquitously in all oceans. It can reach up to 10 28 free living cells in total and represents about 25% of microbial plankton cells. Very little of its DNA is non-coding. It harbors podophage-type phages, designated as "pelagiphage" (Zhao et al., 2013) . This small bacterium was designated as the most common organism on the planet. Why is it so successful? This autonomous bacterium is smaller than some parasitic giant viruses. Craig Venter, who first succeeded in sequencing the human genome, tried to minimize the putative smallest genome of a living species, from Mycoplasma mycoides, a parasitic bacterium that lives in ruminants (Gibson et al., 2008 (Gibson et al., , 2010 . His group synthesized a genome of 531,000 bp with 473 genes, 149 of them (32%) with unknown functions (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Among the smallest parasitic living organisms is Nanoarchaeum equitans. It is a thermophile archaeon which lives at 80 • C and at pH 6 with 2% salt (Huber et al., 2003) . Its genome has a size of 490,000 bp and encodes 540 genes. N. equitans is an obligate symbiont of a bigger archaeon, Ignicoccus riding on it as on a horse, hence the name (Huber et al., 2003) .
The world of viruses covers a range of three logs in size of their genomes: from zero genes to about 2,500 genes amounting to about 2,500,000 bp of DNA. The zero-gene viroids are about 300 bases in length (Figure 3) .
The virosphere is the most successful reservoir of biological entities on our planet in terms of numbers of particles, speed of replication, growth rates, and sequence space. There are about 10 33 viruses on our planet and they are present in every single existing species (Suttle, 2005) .
There is no living species without viruses! Viruses also occur freely in the oceans, in the soil, in clouds up to the stratosphere and higher, to at least 300 km in altitude. They populate the human intestine, birth canal, and the outside of the body as protective layer against microbial populations. Microbes contain phages that are activated during stress conditions such as lack of nutrients, change in temperatures, lack of space and other changes of environmental conditions.
One of the most earth-shaking papers of this century was the publication of the human genome sequence (Lander et al., 2001) . About half, possibly even two-thirds of the sequence are composed of more or less complete endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) and related retroelements (REs) (de Koning et al., 2011) . REs amplify via copy-and-paste mechanisms involving a reverse transcriptase step from an RNA intermediate into DNA. In addition, DNA transposable elements (TEs) move by a cutand-paste mechanism. The origin of REs is being discussed as remnants of ancient retroviral germline infections that became evolutionarily fixed in the genome. About 450,000 human ERV (HERV) elements constitute about 8% of the human genome consisting of hallmark retroviral elements like the gag, pol, env genes and flanking long terminal repeats (LTR) that act as promoters (Lander et al., 2001) . Howard Temin, one of the discoverers of the reverse transcriptase, in 1985 already described endogenous retrovirus-like elements, which he estimated to about 10% of the human and mouse genome sequence (Temin, 1985) . The actual number is about 45% as estimated today (Lander et al., 2001) . In some genes such as the Protein Kinase Inhibitor B (PKIB) gene we determined about 70% retrovirusrelated sequences (Moelling and Broecker, 2015) . Is there a limit? Could it have been 100%? Retroviruses are estimated to have entered the lineage of the mammalian genome 550 million years ago (MYA) (Hayward, 2017) . Older ERV sequences may exist but are unrecognizable today due to the accumulation of mutations.
ERVs undergo mutations, deletions or homologous recombination events with large deletions and can become as short as solo LTR elements, which are a few hundred bp in length -the left-overs from full-length retroviral genomes of about 10,000 bp. The LTR promoters can deregulate neighboring genes. Homologous recombination events may be considered as gene loss or gene reduction events. It is the assumption that the ERVs, which were no longer needed for host cell defense, were no longer selected for by evolution and consequently deleted as unnecessary consumers of energy.
Eugene Koonin points out that infection and integration are unique events occurring at a fast pace, while loss and gene reduction may take much longer time frames (Wolf and Koonin, 2013) .
A frequent gene reduction of eukaryotic genomes is the loss of the viral envelope protein encoded by the env gene. Without a coat, retroviruses can no longer leave the cell and infect other cells. They lose mobility and become obligatory intracellular elements. Helper viruses can supply envelope proteins in trans and mobilize the viruses. TEs or REs can be regarded as examples of coat-free intracellular virus relics -or could it have been the other way round, perhaps precursors of full-length retroviruses?
These elements can be amplified intracellularly and modify the host genomes by integration with the potential danger of gene disruption and genetic changes. REs can lead to gene duplications and pseudogene development, with one copy for stable conservation of acquired functions and the other one for innovations (Cotton and Page, 2005) . Such duplications constitute large amounts of mammalian genomes (Zhang, 2003) . Retroviruses have an RNase H moiety duplication, one of which serves as a catalytically inactive linker between the RT polymerase and the enzymatically active RNase H (Xiong and Eickbush, 1990; Malik and Eickbush, 2001; Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) . This gene duplication dates back to 500 mio years (Cotton and Page, 2005) .
Gene duplications are a common cause of cancer, which often occurs only in the genome of the cancer cell itself, less affecting offsprings. Myc, Myb, ErbB2, Ras, and Raf are oncogenes amplified in diverse types of human cancers (Vogelstein and Kinzler, 2002) . The ability of retroviruses to integrate makes them distinct from endosymbionts which stay separate. Yet the net result is very similar, acquisition of new genetic information, which is transmitted to the next generation, if the germline is infected and endogenization of the virus occurred.
Viral integration is not limited to eukaryotic cells but also a mechanism in prokaryotes for maintenance of the lysogenic state of phages inside bacteria.
Also, for other eukaryotic viruses such as HBV, the envelope surface antigen BHsAg can be deleted, which leads to an obligatory intracellular life style for the virus, which especially in the presence of HCV promotes cancer (Yang et al., 2016) .
HIV has been shown to rapidly lose one of its auxiliary genes, nef, originally for negative factor. The gene was lost within a rather low number of passages of the virus grown under tissue culture conditions by selection for high virus titer producing cells. Deletion of nef resulted in a significant increase of the virus titer in culture -hence the name. The nef gene product was of no need inside tissue culture cells, rather it was inhibitory for replication. However, it is essential for pathogenicity in animals, and subsequently nef was reinterpreted as "necessary factor" (Flint, 2015) .
Also, the human hosts of HIV can lose a significant terminal portion of a seven transmembrane receptor in lymphocytes, the primary target cell for HIV entry and for virus uptake. This molecule, the CCR5 cytokine receptor is truncated by 32 carboxy-terminal amino acids (CCR5-32), disabling the receptor functionally. The allele frequency of the mutant CCR5-32 mutant is about 10% in the European population, making these people resistant to HIV infections (Solloch et al., 2017) . This gene loss in Europeans has been shown to make the individuals resistant not only against HIV infection but also against malaria. This may have been the selective pressure in the past before HIV/AIDS arose. No side effect for humans lacking this gene has been described (Galvani and Slatkin, 2003) .
Viruses have been proven to be drivers of evolution (Villarreal and Witzany, 2010) , including the human genome, which by at least 45% is composed of sequences related to retroviruses. In addition, endogenized retroviruses supplied the syncytin genes that are essential for the development of the mammalian placenta, and allowed the growth of embryos without its rejection by the maternal immune system (Dupressoir et al., 2012) . Thus, the same property which causes immunodeficiency in HIV-infected patients and leads to AIDS causes syncytia formation, cell fusion after infection by a retrovirus. Viruses have also been proposed to be at the origin of the evolution of adaptive immunity (Villarreal, 2009 ). Thus, viruses shaped genomes by supplying essential genes and mechanisms.
Endogenization of retroviruses has occurred in the mammalian genomes for at least 550 mio years (Hayward, 2017) . If the integrated ERVs did not provide any selective advantage, they deteriorated and accumulated mutations with loss of function. This was directly proven by reconstruction of an infectious retrovirus from the consensus sequence of 9 defective endogenous virus sequences, designated as Phoenix. The virus was expressed from a constructed synthetic DNA clone in cell culture and formed virus particles identified by high resolution microscopic analysis (Dewannieux and Heidmann, 2013) .
The koalas in Australia are currently undergoing endogenization of a retrovirus (koala retrovirus, KoRV) in "real time" and demonstrate possible consequences for immunity. In the early 1900s, some individuals were transferred to islands, including Kangaroo Island, close to the Australian mainland for repopulation purposes, as koalas were threatened to become extinct. Today, the majority of the koala population is infected by KoRV, which is closely related to the Gibbon ape leukemia virus (GALV). Yet, koalas isolated on Kangaroo Island are KoRV negative, which allows dating the introduction of KoRV into the koala population to about one hundred years ago. Many of the infected koalas fell ill and died, yet some populations became resistant within about 100 years, corresponding to about 10 generations. The koalas likely developed resistance due to the integrated DNA proviruses. The retrovirus is transmitted as exogenous as well as endogenous virus, similar to the Jaagsiekte sheep retrovirus (JSRV), whereby the endogenized viruses protect with a viral gene product, such as Env, against de novo infections by "superinfection exclusion" (Tarlinton, 2012) . The contribution of retroviruses to the antiviral defense is striking, since all retroviral genes have analogous genes in the siRNA/RNAi defense mechanism of eukaryotic cells (Moelling et al., 2006) .
Retroviruses can protect against infection by other related viruses, for example, by expressing Env proteins that block cellsurface receptors (Villarreal, 2011) . A comparable mechanism protects bacterial cells against DNA phages, by integrated phage DNA fragments that are transcribed into mRNA and hybridize to incoming new DNA phages and thereby lead to their destruction by hybrid-specific nucleases, CRISPR/Cas immunity (Charpentier and Doudna, 2013) . It is often not realized that immunity acquisition in bacteria and mammalian cells follow analogous mechanisms (Figure 4) .
Integration of retroviruses normally occurs in somatic cells after infection as an obligatory step during the viral life cycle. Infection of germline cells can lead to transmission to the next generation and ultimately result in inherited resistance. Endogenized retroviruses likely caused resistance FIGURE 4 | Viruses protect against viruses: retroviruses protect a cell against a new infection by a similar virus designated as "superinfection exclusion" or viral interference. This is mediated by viral gene products such as proteins or nucleic acids. Similarly, phages protect against phages: superinfection of bacteria is prevented by CRISPR/Cas RNA originating from previous infections. The mechanisms of defense against viruses and phages are analogous. Protection by viruses or phages against superinfections represents cellular defense and acquired immunity. The four examples are discussed in the text.
to the exogenous counterparts. Similarly, resistance to Simian Immune Deficiency virus (SIV) in some monkey species may be explained by endogenization (Li et al., 2017 (Li et al., , 2018 . In the case of phages and their prokaryotic hosts the mechanism is described as CRISPR/Cas, which follow analogous principles of "endogenization" of incoming genetic material for subsequent exclusion.
One may speculate that HIV may also eventually become endogenized into the human genome. There is some evidence that HIV can infect human germline cells and can be transmitted to the embryonic genome (Wang et al., 2011) . How long this may take is not known -10 generations?
The loss of function of ERVs can occur by mutations, deletions of the env or other genes and ultimately all coding genes by homologous recombination, leaving behind only one LTR. The number of retrovirus-like elements add up to about 450,000, corresponding to 8% of the human genome (Lander et al., 2001; Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). The promoter regions were analyzed for their contribution to cancer by activating neighboring genes -as a consequence of a former retrovirus infection. Indeed, activated cellular genes by "downstream promotion" were identified in animal studies with activation of the myc gene as one of many examples, leading to chronic, not acute development of cancer (Ott et al., 2013) . As a general mechanism for human cancer today the LTRs are, however, not identified as a major culprit. Most of the ERVs we find today have been integrated during evolution in introns or other regions where their presence is relatively harmless. Did the other ones result in death of the carriers which disappeared? The effects of LTRs on the expression levels of neighboring host genes was studied with the endogenous human virus, HERV-K, as a possible cause of cancer, but this appears not to be a general phenomenon (Broecker et al., 2016b) . As shown for the koalas, ERVs can confer immunity to viral infections (Feschotte and Gilbert, 2012) .
A related ERV, HERV-H, was shown to produce an RNA that keeps early embryonic cells pluripotent and even revert adult cells to regain pluripotency (Grow et al., 2015) . Thus, the role of ERVs may be more complex than we presently know.
Transposable elements and REs that lost the ability of cellular transmission by deletion of the coat protein majorly contribute to genetic complexity of host cells. They are "locked" inside the cells and are major drivers of the increase of genetic complexity (Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). One could speculate that these intracellular elements are replicationincompetent retroviruses lacking coats (Lander et al., 2001) . Bats transmit viruses such as Ebola and SARS coronavirus without suffering from disease (Beltz, 2018) . Even RNA viruses such as Bornaviruses have been shown to integrate by illegitimate reverse transcription, possibly also supplying immunity against superinfection (Katzourakis and Gifford, 2010) .
There are two prominent events that significantly contributed to the success of life and the formation of cells. Both of them are associated with gene reduction. This phenomenon may play a role for the evolution of viruses from autonomous to parasitic lifestyles. In the 1960s Lynn Margulis proposed an extracellular origin for mitochondria (Margulis, 1970 (Margulis, , 1993 ). An ancestral cell, perhaps an archaeon, was infected by an anaerobic bacterium, which gave rise to mitochondria. Similarly, cyanobacteria formed the chloroplasts in modern plant cells. Mitochondria arose around 1.45 billion years ago (BYA) (Embley and Martin, 2006) . Mitochondria and chloroplasts are the most striking examples for a change in lifestyle from autonomous bacteria to endosymbionts. This transition is often considered as extremely rare and a hallmark of evolution of life on our planet. However, there are many other obligate intracellular parasites such as Rickettsia, Chlamydia trachomatis, Coxiella burnetii (the causative agent of Q fever), Mycobacterium leprae, M. tuberculosis, and M. mycoides (Beare et al., 2006) .
The change of lifestyle of the endosymbionts in the two cases of mitochondria and chloroplasts is striking. Both of them drastically reduced their genetic make-up. Mitochondria contain less than 37 genes, left from the original about 3,000 genes. Is endogenization of retroviruses, the ERVs, which are integrated into germline cells, related to endosymbiosis? Are these endosymbionts models for the transition from autonomous lifestyle to a parasitic life-which may have taken place with viruses? A more recent typical example for a reductive evolution are Rickettsia. These bacteria were assumed for some time to be viruses because of their obligatory intracellular parasitic existence. Rickettsia have evolved from autonomously replicating bacteria. Reductive evolution of endosymbionts can yield bacteria with tiny genomes on the expense of autonomous extracellular life. Their genomes are 1.11 mio bp in length with about 834 protein-coding genes, and loss of 24% by reductive evolution (Ogata et al., 2001) . Rickettsia may have some relationship with cyanobacteria, which are considered as the major symbionts.
Can one speculate that viruses may have been autonomous entities initially? Viroids may have undergone transition from autonomy to parasites, just as shown for mitochondria, chloroplasts or Rickettsia? To which extent have viruses been autonomous and independent of cellular metabolisms originally -and contributed to the origin of cells? Could they only later have lost their autonomy and become parasitic?
Viruses are minimalistic in their composition and must have undergone stringent gene reductions (Flint, 2015) . How small can their genomes become? Most coding RNA viruses still contain regulatory elements, ncRNA at the 3 and 5 terminal regions for ribosomal entry, protein synthesis, transcriptional regulation, and others.
A subgroup of retroviruses is an interesting example in respect to simultaneous loss and gain of genetic information. The oncogenic retroviruses or tumorviruses can recombine with cellular genes which under the promoters of retroviruses can become oncogenes and drivers of cancer. About a hundred oncogenes have been selected for in the laboratories and studied over decades for understanding the molecular mechanisms of cancer. Selection for growth advantages of the host cells led to the discovery of the fastest growth-promoting oncogenes we know today, such as Ras, Raf, ErbB or Myc, which are in part successful targets for anticancer drugs (Moelling et al., 1984) .
These oncogenes were in most cases taken up by the retroviruses at the expense of structural (gag), replicating (pol) or envelope (env) genes, and are often expressed as fusion proteins with Gag. Thus, oncogenic retroviruses are obligatory intracellular defective viruses and were selected for in the laboratory by researchers for the oncogenes with the most potent growth promoting ability. They need the supply of replicatory genes in trans from co-infecting helper viruses to infect other cells (Flint, 2015) . Retroviruses are able to pick up cellular genes, transfer and integrate them into neighboring cells. Some strains of Rous sarcoma virus maintain replication competent when carrying the cell-derived src (for sarcoma) oncogene encoding a protein of 536 amino acids that apparently can fit into the retroviral particle along with the full-size viral genome (Broecker et al., 2016a) . Spatial reasons may have influenced the formation of oncogenic retroviruses and limited their size and thereby led to their defective phenotypes.
There are indications that the uncontrolled activity of (retro)transposons in germline cells can result in diseases such as male infertility -presumably by "error catastrophe, " caused by too many transposition events. In mammals, piRNAs tame transposon activity by means of the RNase H activity of PIWI proteins during spermatogenesis (Girard et al., 2006) .
Only a minority of viruses are pathogens; most of them do not cause diseases. On the contrary, they are most important as drivers of evolution, as transmitters of genetic material, as innovative agents. In particular, the RNA viruses are the most innovative ones. Some of them are pathogenic and dangerous, such as HIV or influenza virus, or viroids in plants. RNA viruses are able to change so rapidly that the host immune system is unable to counteract the infection. Pathogenicity arises when environmental conditions change, for instance, when a virus enters a new organism or species.
Increase of cellular complexity by viruses is an important feature of evolution. Such major evolutionary changes are recently taken as arguments against the evolutionary theory by Charles Darwin who considered gradual changes, small increments by mutations as the main basis for selection and evolution. New criticism is addressing this thinking, considering larger changes as evolutionary drivers. Such changes arise by many complex phenomena such as endosymbiosis, infection by prokaryotes, viruses and fungi, recombination of genes, HGT, infections, sex. Dramatic changes such as endosymbiosis or pathogen infections extend Darwin's concept of evolution.
There are numerous examples for the contribution of viruses to the evolution of life since at least as long as 550 MYA (Hayward, 2017) . But genetic noise through random mutations does not allow us to go back to the origin of life. It may not be impossible that the earliest compartment was indistinguishable, either a pre-cell or a pre-virus. By analogy one may speculate that at some point autonomous viruses gave up independence for an obligatory intracellular life -as has been described for mitochondria and chloroplasts but also intracellular bacteria such as Rickettsia. This speculation is based on the concept that early life must have started simple and with high genetic variability and then became more complex. But complexity can be given up for a less energy consuming lifestyle with small genomes and high speed of replication (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . Therefore, the question may be repeated: "Are viruses our oldest ancestors?" Some fossil life can be partially reproduced in vitro by Spiegelman's Monster and Eigen's follow-up experiments, explaining the great surviving potential of simple ncRNA.
Viruses can be pathogens, but their recognition as primarily causing diseases is wrong. This notion is based on the history of viruses in medicine, as explained in a book entitled "Viruses: More Friends Than Foes" (Moelling, 2017) . The scenario described here focuses on viruses as drivers of evolution.
The early RNA world gained interest 20-30 years ago as evidenced by the references provided above. Surprisingly, there are scientists who still believe in the "pansperm hypothesis" and think that retroviruses are of extraterrestric origin (Steele et al., 2018) . The recent interest in the origin of life arose from the newly discovered exoplanets whose number increases daily -and which may be as numerous as 10 25 . Thus, pure statistics make some people believe that there is extraterrestrial life.
The extraterrestric life is mimicked in laboratories on Earth with many assumptions -perhaps this overview stimulates some thinking. The discussion presented here should be taken as concept about simple replicating and evolving entities possibly arising from different building blocks in other environments, with structure being more relevant than sequence. | What were the earliest replicating entities that fulfill several criteria for life? | 1,177 | ribozymes or viroids | 1,032 |
1,690 | Viruses and Evolution – Viruses First? A Personal Perspective
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433886/
SHA: f3b9fc0f8e0a431366196d3e835e1ec368b379d1
Authors: Moelling, Karin; Broecker, Felix
Date: 2019-03-19
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00523
License: cc-by
Abstract: The discovery of exoplanets within putative habitable zones revolutionized astrobiology in recent years. It stimulated interest in the question about the origin of life and its evolution. Here, we discuss what the roles of viruses might have been at the beginning of life and during evolution. Viruses are the most abundant biological entities on Earth. They are present everywhere, in our surrounding, the oceans, the soil and in every living being. Retroviruses contributed to about half of our genomic sequences and to the evolution of the mammalian placenta. Contemporary viruses reflect evolution ranging from the RNA world to the DNA-protein world. How far back can we trace their contribution? Earliest replicating and evolving entities are the ribozymes or viroids fulfilling several criteria of life. RNA can perform many aspects of life and influences our gene expression until today. The simplest structures with non-protein-coding information may represent models of life built on structural, not genetic information. Viruses today are obligatory parasites depending on host cells. Examples of how an independent lifestyle might have been lost include mitochondria, chloroplasts, Rickettsia and others, which used to be autonomous bacteria and became intracellular parasites or endosymbionts, thereby losing most of their genes. Even in vitro the loss of genes can be recapitulated all the way from coding to non-coding RNA. Furthermore, the giant viruses may indicate that there is no sharp border between living and non-living entities but an evolutionary continuum. Here, it is discussed how viruses can lose and gain genes, and that they are essential drivers of evolution. This discussion may stimulate the thinking about viruses as early possible forms of life. Apart from our view “viruses first”, there are others such as “proteins first” and “metabolism first.”
Text: Mycoplasma mycoides by systematic deletion of individual genes resulted in a synthetic minimal genome of 473 genes (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Can one consider simpler living entities?
There are elements with zero genes that fulfill many criteria for early life: ribozymes, catalytic RNAs closely related to viroids. They were recovered in vitro from 10 15 molecules (aptamers), 220 nucleotides in length, by 10 rounds of selection. Among the many RNA species present in this collection of quasispecies RNAs were catalytically active members, enzymatically active ribozymes. The sequence space for 220-mer RNAs is about 3 × 10 132 (Eigen, 1971; Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Brackett and Dieckmann, 2006) .
The selected ribozymes were able to replicate, cleave, join, and form peptide bonds. They can polymerize progeny chemically, allow for mutations to occur and can evolve. One molecule serves as catalyst, the other one as substrate. Replication of ribozymes was demonstrated in the test tube (Lincoln and Joyce, 2009) . Ribozymes can form peptide bonds between amino acids (Zhang and Cech, 1997) . Thus, small peptides were available by ribozyme activity. Consequently, an RNA modification has been proposed as peptide nucleic acid (PNA), with more stable peptide bonds instead of phosphodiester bonds (Zhang and Cech, 1997; Joyce, 2002) . Replication of RNA molecules can be performed chemically from RNA without polymerase enzymes. In addition, deoxyribozymes can form from ribonucleotides (Wilson and Szostak, 1999) . Thus, DNA can arise from RNA chemically, without the key protein enzyme, the reverse transcriptase.
An entire living world is possible from non-coding RNA (ncRNA) before evolution of the genetic code and protein enzymes. Ribozymes naturally consist of circular single-stranded RNAs (Orgel, 2004) . They lack the genetic triplet code and do not encode proteins. Instead, they exhibit structural information by hairpin-loops that form hydrogen bonds between incomplete double strands, and loops free to interact with other molecules. They represent a quasispecies in which many species of RNA may form, such as ribozymes, tRNA-like molecules, and other ncRNAs. RNAs within such a pool can bind amino acids. Ninety different amino acids have been identified on the Murchison meteorite found in Australia, while on Earth only about 20 of them are used for protein synthesis (Meierhenrich, 2008) . Where formation of ribozymes occurred on the early Earth is a matter of speculation. The hydrothermal vents such as black smokers in the deep ocean are possibilities where life may have started (Martin et al., 2008) . There, temperature gradients and clay containing minerals such as magnesium or manganese are available. Pores or niches offer possibilities for concentration of building blocks, which is required for chemical reactions to occur. Interestingly, also ice is a candidate for ribozyme formation and chemical reactions. Ice crystals displace the biomolecules into the liquid phase, which leads to concentration, creating a quasicellular compartmentalization where de novo synthesis of nucleotide precursors is promoted. There, RNA and ribozymes can emerge, which are capable of self-replication (Attwater et al., 2010) .
tRNA-amino acid complexes can find RNAs as "mRNAs." Such interactions could have contributed to the evolution of the genetic code. This sequence of events can lead to primitive ribosome precursors. Ribozymes are the essential catalytic elements in ribosomes: "The ribosome is a ribozyme" (Cech, 2000) , supplemented with about a hundred scaffold proteins later during evolution. The proteins have structural functions and contribute indirectly to enzymatic activity. Are these ribosomebound ribozymes fossils from the early Earth? Small peptides can be formed by ribozymes before ribosomes evolved, whereby single or dimeric amino acids may originate from the universe (Meierhenrich, 2008) .
Small peptides with basic amino acids can increase the catalytic activity of ribozymes as shown in vitro (Müller et al., 1994) . Such proteins are known as RNA-binding proteins from RNA viruses that protect the RNA genome, with motifs such as RAPRKKG of the nucleocapsid NCp7 of HIV (Schmalzbauer et al., 1996) . Peptides can enhance the catalytic activity of ribozymes up to a 100-fold (Müller et al., 1994) . Such peptides of RNA viruses serve as chaperones that remove higher ordered RNA structures, allowing for more efficient interaction of RNA molecules and increasing transcription rates of RNA polymerases (Müller et al., 1994) . Ribonucleoproteins may have also been functionally important during the evolution of ribosomes (Harish and Caetano-Anolles, 2012) .
These pre-ribosomal structures are also similar to precursorlike structures of retroviruses. Reverse transcription can be performed by ribozymes chemically. This action does not necessarily require a protein polymerase such as the reverse transcriptase. Similarly, deoxyribonucleotides can arise by removal of an oxygen without the need of a protein enzyme (a reductase) as today, and allow for DNA polymerization (Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Joyce, 2002) . The same elements of the precursors for ribosomes are also building blocks of retroviruses, which may have a similar evolutionary origin (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . tRNAs serve as primers for the reverse transcriptase, and the sequence of promoters of transposable elements are derived from tRNAs (Lander et al., 2001) . The ribozymes developed into more complex self-cleaving group II introns with insertion of genes encoding a reverse transcriptase and additional proteins (Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) (Figure 1) .
It came as a surprise that the genomes of almost all species are rich in ncDNA, transcribed into ncRNAs but not encoding proteins, as evidenced, for instance, by the "Encyclopedia of DNA Elements" (ENCODE) project. ncDNA amounts to more than 98% of the human DNA genome (Deveson et al., 2017) . Higher organisms tend to have more non-coding information, which allows for more complex modes of gene regulation. The ncRNAs are regulators of the protein-coding sequences. Highly complex organisms such as humans typically have a high number of ncRNA and regulatory mechanisms. ncRNA can range from close to zero in the smallest bacteria such as Pelagibacter ubique to about 98% in the human genome.
RNA viruses such as the retrovirus HIV harbor ncRNAs for gene regulation such as the trans-activating response element (TAR), the binding site for the Tat protein for early viral gene expression. Tat has a highly basic domain comprising mostly Lys and Arg residues, resembling other RNA binding proteins. ncRNA also serves on viral RNA genomes as ribosomal entry sites, primer binding sites or packaging signals. DNA synthesis depends on RNA synthesis as initial event, with RNA primers as starters for DNA replication, inside of cells as FIGURE 1 | A compartment is shown with essential components of life as discussed in the text. Non-coding RNA (ncRNA), ribozymes or viroids, can perform many steps for life without protein-coding genes but only by structural information. Individual amino acids are indicated as black dots and may be available on Earth from the universe. DNA may have existed before retroviruses. The compartment can be interpreted as pre-virus or pre-cell. Viroid, green; RNA, red; DNA, black.
well as during retroviral replication, proving a requirement of RNA (Flint, 2015) .
The number of mammalian protein-coding genes is about 20,000. Surprisingly, this is only a fifth of the number of genes of bread wheat (Appels et al., 2018) . Tulips, maize and other plants also have larger genomes, indicating that the number of genes does not necessarily reflect the complexity of an organism. What makes these plant genomes so large, is still an open question. Could the giant genomes possibly be the result to breeding of plants by farmers or gardeners?
According to Szostak there are molecules which appear like relics from the RNA world such as acetyl-CoA or vitamin B12, both of which are bound to a ribonucleotide for no obvious reason -was it "forgotten" to be removed? (Roberts and Szostak, 1997; Szostak et al., 2001; Szostak, 2011) . Perhaps the connected RNA serves as structural stabilizer. Lipid vesicles could have formed the first compartments and enclosed ribozymes, tRNAs with selected amino acids, and RNA which became mRNA. Is this a pre-cell or pre-virus (Figure 1) ? Patel et al. (2015) demonstrated that the building blocks of life, ribonucleotides, lipids and amino acids, can be formed from C, H, O, P, N, S in a "one pot" synthesis. This study can be regarded as a follow-up study of the classical Urey-Miller in vitro synthesis of biomolecules (Miller, 1953; Miller and Urey, 1959) . Transition from the RNA to the DNA world was promoted by the formation of the reverse transcriptase. The enzyme was first described in retroviruses but it is almost ubiquitous and found in numerous cellular species, many of which with unknown functions (Simon and Zimmerly, 2008; Lescot et al., 2016) . It is an important link between the RNA and the DNA worlds. The name reverse transcriptase is historical and irritating because it is the "real" transcriptase during the transition from the RNA to the DNA world. Similarly, the ribonuclease H (RNase H) is an essential enzyme of retroviruses (Mölling et al., 1971) . The RNase H turned out to be one of the five most frequent and ancient proteins (Ma et al., 2008 ) that belongs to a superfamily of more than sixty different unique representatives and 152 families with numerous functions (Majorek et al., 2014) .
Some of the many tRNAs can become loaded with amino acids. There are viruses containing tRNA-like structures (TLS), resembling these early RNAs (Dreher, 2009) . The TLS of these viruses typically bind to a single amino acid. TLS-viruses include plant viruses, such as Turnip yellow mosaic virus, in Peanut clump virus, Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), and Brome mosaic virus. Only half a tRNA is found in Narnaviruses of fungi. The amino acids known to be components of tRNA-like viruses are valine, histidine and tyrosine. The structures were also designated as "mimicry, " enhancing translation (Dreher, 2009 (Dreher, , 2010 . They look like "frozen" precursor-like elements for protein synthesis. This combination of a partial tRNA linked to one amino acid can be interpreted as an evolutionary early step toward protein synthesis, trapped in a viral element.
Ribozymes are related to the protein-free viroids. Viroids are virus-like elements that belong to the virosphere, the world of viruses (Chela-Flores, 1994) . Viroids lack protein coats and therefore were initially not designated as viruses but virus-like viroids when they were discovered in 1971 by Theodor Diener. He described viroids as "living fossils" (Diener, 2016) (Figure 2) .
From infected potatoes, Diener isolated the Potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd) whose genome was about a 100-fold smaller than those of viruses known at that time. The viroids known today are ranging from 246 to 467 nucleotides. They contain circular single-stranded RNA, are protein-free and self-replicating with no genetic information, but only structural FIGURE 2 | Viroids are hairpin-loop structures and are shown schematically and as electron micrograph. Viroids are, like ribozymes, without genetic information and play major biological roles today in plant diseases, in carnation flowers, in liver cancer, as catalyst of protein synthesis in ribosomes and as circular regulatory RNAs, as "sponges" for other regulatory RNAs.
information in the form of hairpin-loops (Riesner et al., 1979) . They can generate copies of themselves in the appropriate environment. They were designated as the "frontiers of life" (Flores et al., 2014) .
The knowledge of virus composition was based on TMV and its crystallization by Wendell Stanley in 1935 (Pennazio and Roggero, 2000) . The genome of TMV is protein-coding singlestranded RNA of about 6,400 nucleotides that is enclosed by a rod-like protein coat. Viroids, in contrast, do not encode proteins and lack coats but they are closely related to viruses. Viroids can lose their autonomy and rely on host RNA polymerases to replicate, are capable of infecting plants and many are economically important pathogens. There are two families, the nucleus-replicating Pospiviroidae such as PSTVd and the chloroplast-replicating Avsunviroidae like the Avocado sunblotch viroid (ASBVd). Their replication requires host enzymes. Thus, autonomy is replaced by dependence on host enzymes and an intracellular lifestyle.
Most viroids are often enzymatically active ribozymes -yet they are examples that this trait can get lost as a result of changing environmental conditions. Loss of ribozyme activity is a functional, not a genetic loss. Only the nuclear variants, the Pospiviroidae, can lose their ribozyme activity and use the cellular RNase III enzyme for their replication. In contrast, the Avsunviroidae are still active hammerhead ribozymes. Thus, inside the nucleus of a host cell, the enzymatic RNA function can become unnecessary. Not genes, but a function, the catalytic activity, gets lost.
Viroids did apparently not gain genes but cooperated for a more complex lifestyle. For example, Carnation small viroid-like RNA (CarSV RNA) cooperates with a retrovirus and is accompanied by a homologous DNA generated by a reverse transcriptase. This enzyme presumably originates from a pararetrovirus of plants. Pararetroviruses package virus particles at a different stage during replication than retroviruses, the DNA, not the RNA. This unique combination between two viral elements has so far only been detected with CarSV in carnation flowers (Flores et al., 2005 (Flores et al., , 2014 . Why did such a cooperation evolve -perhaps by breeding gardeners? RNA is sensitive to degradation; therefore, genetic increase and growth of the genome may not be favorable energetically -at least not in plants. Gain of function is, in this case, cooperation.
The circular RNA (circRNA) is related to ribozymes/viroids as a chief regulator of other regulatory RNAs, a "sponge" absorbing small RNAs. Micro RNAs (miRNAs) are post-transcriptional regulators that are affected by the presence of circRNAs. circRNAs were detected in human and mouse brains and testes as well as in plants. They can bind 70 conserved miRNAs in a cell and amount up to 25,000 molecules (Hansen et al., 2013) . Their structure is reminiscent of catalytically active ribozymes.
There is an exceptional viroid that gained coding information and entered the human liver (Taylor, 2009) . The viroid is known as hepatitis delta virus (HDV). It has the smallest genome of any known animal virus of about 1,680 nucleotides. It has properties typical of viroids, since it contains circRNA, forms similar hairpin-loops and replicates in the nucleus using host enzymes. Two polymerases have to redirect their specificity from DNA to RNA to generate the HDV genome and antigenome. Both of them have ribozyme activity. In contrast to other ribozymes, HDV encodes a protein, the hepatitis delta antigen (HDVAg) that occurs in two forms, the small-HDVAg (24 kDa) supporting replication and the large-HDVAg (27 kDa) that helps virion assembly. The gene was presumably picked up from the host cell by recombination of HDV's mRNA intermediate with a host mRNA. Transmission depends on a helper virus, the Hepatitis B virus (HBV), which delivers the coat (Taylor, 2009 ) Does packaging by a helper virus protect the genome and thereby allow for a larger viroid to exist?
In plants, viroids may not be able to become bigger possibly due to their sensitivity to degradation -but they cannot become much smaller either. Only a single viroid is known that is completely composed of protein-coding RNA with triplets (AbouHaidar et al., 2014). Viroids and related replicating RNAs are error-prone replicating units and the error frequency imposes a certain minimal size onto them, as they would otherwise become extinct. This mechanism has been described as "error catastrophe, " which prevents survival (Eigen, 1971 (Eigen, , 2013 . The viroids and related RNAs are the smallest known replicons. Smaller ones would become extinct in the absence of repair systems.
In summary, RNA can catalyze many reactions. Protein enzymes which may have evolved later have higher catalytic activities. Ribozymes are carriers of information, but do not require coding genes. Information is stored in their sequence and structure. Thus, replication of an initial RNA is followed by flow of information, from DNA to RNA to protein, as described the Central Dogma (Crick, 1968) . Even an information flow from protein to DNA has been described for some archaeal proteins (Béguin et al., 2015) . The DNA-protein world contains numerous ncRNAs with key functions. ncRNA may serve as a model compound for the origin of life on other planets. Hereby not the chemical composition of this molecule is of prime relevance, but its simplicity and multifunctionality. Furthermore, RNA is software and hardware in a single molecule, which makes it unique in our world. There are other scenarios besides the here discussed "virus-first, " such as "protein-first", "metabolism-fist" or the "lipid world" (Segré et al., 2001; Andras and Andras, 2005; Vasas et al., 2010; Moelling, 2012) . Some of these alternative concepts were built on phylogenomics, the reconstruction of the tree of life by genome sequencing (Delsuc et al., 2005) . Surprisingly, it was Sir Francis Crick, one of the discoverers of the DNA double-helix, who stated that he would not be surprised about a world completely built of RNA. A similar prediction was made by Walter Gilbert (Crick, 1968; Gilbert, 1986) . What a vision! Our world was almost 50 years later defined as "RNAprotein" world (Altman, 2013) . One can speculate our world was built of ribozymes or viroids, which means "viruses first."
ncRNAs appear as relics from the past RNA world, before DNA, the genetic code and proteins evolved. However, ncRNA is essential in our biological DNA world today. It is possible to produce such ncRNA today in the test tube by loss of genic information from protein-coding RNA. This reduction to ncRNA was demonstrated in vitro with phage RNA. Phage Qβ genomic RNA, 4,217 nucleotides in length, was incubated in the presence of Qβ replicase, free nucleotides and salts, a rich milieu in the test tube. The RNA was allowed to replicate by means of the Qβ replicase. Serial transfer of aliquots to fresh medium led to ever faster replication rates and reduction of genomic size, down to 218 nucleotides of ncRNA in 74 generations. This study demonstrated that, depending on environmental conditions, an extreme gene reduction can take place. This experiment performed in 1965 was designated as "Spiegelman's Monster." Coding RNA became replicating ncRNA (Spiegelman et al., 1965; Kacian et al., 1972) ! Manfred Eigen extended this experiment and demonstrated further that a mixture containing no RNA to start with but only ribonucleotides and the Qβ replicase can under the right conditions in a test tube spontaneously generate self-replicating ncRNA. This evolved into a form similar to Spiegelman's Monster. The presence of the replicase enzyme was still necessary in these studies. Furthermore, a change in enzyme concentration and addition of short RNAs or an RNA intercalator influenced the arising RNA population (Sumper and Luce, 1975; Eigen, 2013) . Thus, the complexity of genomes depends on the environment: poor conditions lead to increased complexity and rich environments to reduced complexity.
The process demonstrated in this experiment with viral components indicates that reversion to simplicity, reduction in size, loss of genetic information and speed in replication can be major forces of life, even though this appears to be like a reversion of evolution. The experiment can perhaps be generalized from the test tube to a principle, that the most successful survivors on our planet are the viruses and microorganisms, which became the most abundant entities. Perhaps life can start from there again.
These studies raise the question of how RNA molecules can become longer, if the small polymers become smaller and smaller, replicate faster and outcompete longer ones. This may be overcome by heat flow across an open pore in submerged rocks, which concentrates replicating oligonucleotides from a constant feeding flow and selection for longer strands. This has been described for an increase from 100 to 1,000 nucleotides in vitro. RNA molecules shorter than 75 nucleotides will die out (Kreysing et al., 2015) . Could a poor environment lead to an increase of complexity? This could be tested. Ribozymes were shown to grow in size by uptake of genes, as demonstrated for HDV (Taylor, 2009 ).
An interesting recent unexpected example supporting the notion that environmental conditions influence genetic complexity, is the human gut microbiome. Its complexity increases with diverse food, while uniform rich food reduces its diversity and may lead to diseases such as obesity. Colonization of the human intestinal tract starts at birth. A few dozen bacterial and viral/phage species are conserved between individuals (core sequences) as a stable composition (Broecker et al., 2016c . Dysbiosis has been observed in several chronic diseases and in obesity, a loss of bacterial richness and diversity. Nutrition under affluent conditions with sugar-rich food contributes to obesity, which results in a significant reduction of the complexity of the microbiome. This reduction is difficult to revert (Cotillard et al., 2013; Le Chatelier et al., 2013) . The gut microbiome in human patients with obesity is reminiscent of the gene reduction described in the Spiegelman's Monster experiment: reduction of genes in a rich environment.
The reduction of the complexity of the microbiome is in part attributed to the action of phages, which under such conditions, defined as stress, lyse the bacteria. Fecal microbiota transplantation can even be replaced by soluble fractions containing phages or metabolites from the donor without bacteria (Ott et al., 2017) . Analogously, the most highly complex microbiomes are found in indigenous human tribes in Africa, which live on a broad variety of different nutrients. It is a slow process, though, to increase gut microbiota complexity by diverse nutrition. The obesity-associated microbiota that survive are fitter and more difficult to counteract. Urbanization and westernization of the diet is associated with a loss of microbial biodiversity, loss of microbial organisms and genes (Segata, 2015) .
To understand the mechanism and driving force for genome reduction, deletion rates were tested by insertion of an indicator gene into the Salmonella enterica genome. The loss of the indicator gene was monitored by serial passage in rich medium. After 1,000 generations about 25% of the deletions caused increased bacterial fitness. Deletions resulted in smaller genomes with reduced or absence of DNA repair genes (Koskiniemi et al., 2012) . Gene loss conferred a higher fitness to the bacteria under these experimental conditions.
The recently discovered mimiviruses and other giant viruses are worth considering for understanding the evolution of life with respect to the contribution of viruses. Their hosts are, for example, Acanthamoeba, Chlorella, and Coccolithus algae (Emiliania huxleyi), but also corals or sponges as discussed more recently. Mimiviruses were first discovered in cooling water towers in Bradford, United Kingdom in 2003 with about 1,000 genes, most of which unrelated to previously known genes. Mimiviruses have received attention because they contain elements that were considered hallmarks of living cells, not of viruses, such as elements required for protein synthesis, tRNAs and amino acid transferases. The mimiviruses harbor these building blocks as incomplete sets not sufficient for independent protein synthesis as bacteria or archaea can perform, preventing them from leading an autonomous life (La Scola et al., 2003 Scola et al., , 2008 . They are larger than some bacteria. Giant viruses can be looked at as being on an evolutionary path toward a cellular organism. Alternatively, they may have evolved from a cellular organism by loss of genetic information (Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015) . Giant viruses have frequently taken up genes from their hosts by horizontal gene transfer (HGT) (La Scola et al., 2008; Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015; Colson et al., 2018) . A graph on genome sizes shows that mimiviruses and bacteria overlap in size, indicating a continuous transition between viruses and bacteria and between living and non-living worlds (based on Holmes, 2011) (Figure 3) . Other giant viruses, such as megaviruses, were discovered in the ocean of Chile with 1,120 genes. Most recently the Klosneuvirus was identified in the sewage of the monastery Klosterneuburg in Austria in 2017 with 1.57 million (mio) basepairs (Mitch, 2017) . Pithovirus sibericum is the largest among giant viruses discovered to date with a diameter of 1.5 microns, a genome of 470,000 bp with 467 putative genes, 1.6 microns in length, and it is presumably 30,000 years old as it was recovered from permafrost in Siberia (Legendre et al., 2014) . The smaller Pandoraviruses with 1 micron in length have five times larger genomes, 2,500,000 bp (Philippe et al., 2013) (Figure 3) .
The giant viruses can even be hosts to smaller viruses, the virophages, reminiscent of bacteriophages, the viruses of bacteria. These virophages such as Sputnik are only 50 nm in size with 18,343 bp of circular dsDNA and 21 predicted proteincoding genes. They replicate in viral factories and consume the resources of the mimivirus, thereby destroying it. Some, virophages can even integrate into the genome of the cellular host and can be reactivated when the host is infected by giant viruses. Thus, giant viruses suggest that viruses are close to living entities or may have been alive (La Scola et al., 2008; Fischer and Hackl, 2016) . In biology it is common to distinguish between living and dead matter by the ability to synthesize proteins and replicate autonomously. The giant viruses may be considered as missing link between the two, because they harbor "almost" the protein synthesis apparatus. The transition from living to the non-living world is continuous, not separated by a sharp borderline (Figure 3) .
Viruses are not considered alive by most of the scientific community and as written in textbooks, because they cannot replicate autonomously. Yet some of the giant viruses are equipped with almost all components of the protein synthesis machinery close to bacteria suggesting that they belong to the living matter (Schulz et al., 2017) . The ribozymes may have been the earliest replicating entity. Perhaps also other viruses were initially more independent of the early Earth than they are today. As described in Figure 1 there may have been initially no major difference between an early virus or an early cell. Only later viruses may have given up their autonomous replication and became parasites -as has been described for some bacteria (see below).
Efforts have been made to identify the smallest living cell that is still autonomously replicating. Among the presumably smallest naturally occurring bacteria is Pelagibacter ubique of the SAR11 clade of bacteria (Giovannoni, 2017) , which was discovered in 1990. It is an alpha-proteobacterium with 1,389 genes present ubiquitously in all oceans. It can reach up to 10 28 free living cells in total and represents about 25% of microbial plankton cells. Very little of its DNA is non-coding. It harbors podophage-type phages, designated as "pelagiphage" (Zhao et al., 2013) . This small bacterium was designated as the most common organism on the planet. Why is it so successful? This autonomous bacterium is smaller than some parasitic giant viruses. Craig Venter, who first succeeded in sequencing the human genome, tried to minimize the putative smallest genome of a living species, from Mycoplasma mycoides, a parasitic bacterium that lives in ruminants (Gibson et al., 2008 (Gibson et al., , 2010 . His group synthesized a genome of 531,000 bp with 473 genes, 149 of them (32%) with unknown functions (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Among the smallest parasitic living organisms is Nanoarchaeum equitans. It is a thermophile archaeon which lives at 80 • C and at pH 6 with 2% salt (Huber et al., 2003) . Its genome has a size of 490,000 bp and encodes 540 genes. N. equitans is an obligate symbiont of a bigger archaeon, Ignicoccus riding on it as on a horse, hence the name (Huber et al., 2003) .
The world of viruses covers a range of three logs in size of their genomes: from zero genes to about 2,500 genes amounting to about 2,500,000 bp of DNA. The zero-gene viroids are about 300 bases in length (Figure 3) .
The virosphere is the most successful reservoir of biological entities on our planet in terms of numbers of particles, speed of replication, growth rates, and sequence space. There are about 10 33 viruses on our planet and they are present in every single existing species (Suttle, 2005) .
There is no living species without viruses! Viruses also occur freely in the oceans, in the soil, in clouds up to the stratosphere and higher, to at least 300 km in altitude. They populate the human intestine, birth canal, and the outside of the body as protective layer against microbial populations. Microbes contain phages that are activated during stress conditions such as lack of nutrients, change in temperatures, lack of space and other changes of environmental conditions.
One of the most earth-shaking papers of this century was the publication of the human genome sequence (Lander et al., 2001) . About half, possibly even two-thirds of the sequence are composed of more or less complete endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) and related retroelements (REs) (de Koning et al., 2011) . REs amplify via copy-and-paste mechanisms involving a reverse transcriptase step from an RNA intermediate into DNA. In addition, DNA transposable elements (TEs) move by a cutand-paste mechanism. The origin of REs is being discussed as remnants of ancient retroviral germline infections that became evolutionarily fixed in the genome. About 450,000 human ERV (HERV) elements constitute about 8% of the human genome consisting of hallmark retroviral elements like the gag, pol, env genes and flanking long terminal repeats (LTR) that act as promoters (Lander et al., 2001) . Howard Temin, one of the discoverers of the reverse transcriptase, in 1985 already described endogenous retrovirus-like elements, which he estimated to about 10% of the human and mouse genome sequence (Temin, 1985) . The actual number is about 45% as estimated today (Lander et al., 2001) . In some genes such as the Protein Kinase Inhibitor B (PKIB) gene we determined about 70% retrovirusrelated sequences (Moelling and Broecker, 2015) . Is there a limit? Could it have been 100%? Retroviruses are estimated to have entered the lineage of the mammalian genome 550 million years ago (MYA) (Hayward, 2017) . Older ERV sequences may exist but are unrecognizable today due to the accumulation of mutations.
ERVs undergo mutations, deletions or homologous recombination events with large deletions and can become as short as solo LTR elements, which are a few hundred bp in length -the left-overs from full-length retroviral genomes of about 10,000 bp. The LTR promoters can deregulate neighboring genes. Homologous recombination events may be considered as gene loss or gene reduction events. It is the assumption that the ERVs, which were no longer needed for host cell defense, were no longer selected for by evolution and consequently deleted as unnecessary consumers of energy.
Eugene Koonin points out that infection and integration are unique events occurring at a fast pace, while loss and gene reduction may take much longer time frames (Wolf and Koonin, 2013) .
A frequent gene reduction of eukaryotic genomes is the loss of the viral envelope protein encoded by the env gene. Without a coat, retroviruses can no longer leave the cell and infect other cells. They lose mobility and become obligatory intracellular elements. Helper viruses can supply envelope proteins in trans and mobilize the viruses. TEs or REs can be regarded as examples of coat-free intracellular virus relics -or could it have been the other way round, perhaps precursors of full-length retroviruses?
These elements can be amplified intracellularly and modify the host genomes by integration with the potential danger of gene disruption and genetic changes. REs can lead to gene duplications and pseudogene development, with one copy for stable conservation of acquired functions and the other one for innovations (Cotton and Page, 2005) . Such duplications constitute large amounts of mammalian genomes (Zhang, 2003) . Retroviruses have an RNase H moiety duplication, one of which serves as a catalytically inactive linker between the RT polymerase and the enzymatically active RNase H (Xiong and Eickbush, 1990; Malik and Eickbush, 2001; Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) . This gene duplication dates back to 500 mio years (Cotton and Page, 2005) .
Gene duplications are a common cause of cancer, which often occurs only in the genome of the cancer cell itself, less affecting offsprings. Myc, Myb, ErbB2, Ras, and Raf are oncogenes amplified in diverse types of human cancers (Vogelstein and Kinzler, 2002) . The ability of retroviruses to integrate makes them distinct from endosymbionts which stay separate. Yet the net result is very similar, acquisition of new genetic information, which is transmitted to the next generation, if the germline is infected and endogenization of the virus occurred.
Viral integration is not limited to eukaryotic cells but also a mechanism in prokaryotes for maintenance of the lysogenic state of phages inside bacteria.
Also, for other eukaryotic viruses such as HBV, the envelope surface antigen BHsAg can be deleted, which leads to an obligatory intracellular life style for the virus, which especially in the presence of HCV promotes cancer (Yang et al., 2016) .
HIV has been shown to rapidly lose one of its auxiliary genes, nef, originally for negative factor. The gene was lost within a rather low number of passages of the virus grown under tissue culture conditions by selection for high virus titer producing cells. Deletion of nef resulted in a significant increase of the virus titer in culture -hence the name. The nef gene product was of no need inside tissue culture cells, rather it was inhibitory for replication. However, it is essential for pathogenicity in animals, and subsequently nef was reinterpreted as "necessary factor" (Flint, 2015) .
Also, the human hosts of HIV can lose a significant terminal portion of a seven transmembrane receptor in lymphocytes, the primary target cell for HIV entry and for virus uptake. This molecule, the CCR5 cytokine receptor is truncated by 32 carboxy-terminal amino acids (CCR5-32), disabling the receptor functionally. The allele frequency of the mutant CCR5-32 mutant is about 10% in the European population, making these people resistant to HIV infections (Solloch et al., 2017) . This gene loss in Europeans has been shown to make the individuals resistant not only against HIV infection but also against malaria. This may have been the selective pressure in the past before HIV/AIDS arose. No side effect for humans lacking this gene has been described (Galvani and Slatkin, 2003) .
Viruses have been proven to be drivers of evolution (Villarreal and Witzany, 2010) , including the human genome, which by at least 45% is composed of sequences related to retroviruses. In addition, endogenized retroviruses supplied the syncytin genes that are essential for the development of the mammalian placenta, and allowed the growth of embryos without its rejection by the maternal immune system (Dupressoir et al., 2012) . Thus, the same property which causes immunodeficiency in HIV-infected patients and leads to AIDS causes syncytia formation, cell fusion after infection by a retrovirus. Viruses have also been proposed to be at the origin of the evolution of adaptive immunity (Villarreal, 2009 ). Thus, viruses shaped genomes by supplying essential genes and mechanisms.
Endogenization of retroviruses has occurred in the mammalian genomes for at least 550 mio years (Hayward, 2017) . If the integrated ERVs did not provide any selective advantage, they deteriorated and accumulated mutations with loss of function. This was directly proven by reconstruction of an infectious retrovirus from the consensus sequence of 9 defective endogenous virus sequences, designated as Phoenix. The virus was expressed from a constructed synthetic DNA clone in cell culture and formed virus particles identified by high resolution microscopic analysis (Dewannieux and Heidmann, 2013) .
The koalas in Australia are currently undergoing endogenization of a retrovirus (koala retrovirus, KoRV) in "real time" and demonstrate possible consequences for immunity. In the early 1900s, some individuals were transferred to islands, including Kangaroo Island, close to the Australian mainland for repopulation purposes, as koalas were threatened to become extinct. Today, the majority of the koala population is infected by KoRV, which is closely related to the Gibbon ape leukemia virus (GALV). Yet, koalas isolated on Kangaroo Island are KoRV negative, which allows dating the introduction of KoRV into the koala population to about one hundred years ago. Many of the infected koalas fell ill and died, yet some populations became resistant within about 100 years, corresponding to about 10 generations. The koalas likely developed resistance due to the integrated DNA proviruses. The retrovirus is transmitted as exogenous as well as endogenous virus, similar to the Jaagsiekte sheep retrovirus (JSRV), whereby the endogenized viruses protect with a viral gene product, such as Env, against de novo infections by "superinfection exclusion" (Tarlinton, 2012) . The contribution of retroviruses to the antiviral defense is striking, since all retroviral genes have analogous genes in the siRNA/RNAi defense mechanism of eukaryotic cells (Moelling et al., 2006) .
Retroviruses can protect against infection by other related viruses, for example, by expressing Env proteins that block cellsurface receptors (Villarreal, 2011) . A comparable mechanism protects bacterial cells against DNA phages, by integrated phage DNA fragments that are transcribed into mRNA and hybridize to incoming new DNA phages and thereby lead to their destruction by hybrid-specific nucleases, CRISPR/Cas immunity (Charpentier and Doudna, 2013) . It is often not realized that immunity acquisition in bacteria and mammalian cells follow analogous mechanisms (Figure 4) .
Integration of retroviruses normally occurs in somatic cells after infection as an obligatory step during the viral life cycle. Infection of germline cells can lead to transmission to the next generation and ultimately result in inherited resistance. Endogenized retroviruses likely caused resistance FIGURE 4 | Viruses protect against viruses: retroviruses protect a cell against a new infection by a similar virus designated as "superinfection exclusion" or viral interference. This is mediated by viral gene products such as proteins or nucleic acids. Similarly, phages protect against phages: superinfection of bacteria is prevented by CRISPR/Cas RNA originating from previous infections. The mechanisms of defense against viruses and phages are analogous. Protection by viruses or phages against superinfections represents cellular defense and acquired immunity. The four examples are discussed in the text.
to the exogenous counterparts. Similarly, resistance to Simian Immune Deficiency virus (SIV) in some monkey species may be explained by endogenization (Li et al., 2017 (Li et al., , 2018 . In the case of phages and their prokaryotic hosts the mechanism is described as CRISPR/Cas, which follow analogous principles of "endogenization" of incoming genetic material for subsequent exclusion.
One may speculate that HIV may also eventually become endogenized into the human genome. There is some evidence that HIV can infect human germline cells and can be transmitted to the embryonic genome (Wang et al., 2011) . How long this may take is not known -10 generations?
The loss of function of ERVs can occur by mutations, deletions of the env or other genes and ultimately all coding genes by homologous recombination, leaving behind only one LTR. The number of retrovirus-like elements add up to about 450,000, corresponding to 8% of the human genome (Lander et al., 2001; Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). The promoter regions were analyzed for their contribution to cancer by activating neighboring genes -as a consequence of a former retrovirus infection. Indeed, activated cellular genes by "downstream promotion" were identified in animal studies with activation of the myc gene as one of many examples, leading to chronic, not acute development of cancer (Ott et al., 2013) . As a general mechanism for human cancer today the LTRs are, however, not identified as a major culprit. Most of the ERVs we find today have been integrated during evolution in introns or other regions where their presence is relatively harmless. Did the other ones result in death of the carriers which disappeared? The effects of LTRs on the expression levels of neighboring host genes was studied with the endogenous human virus, HERV-K, as a possible cause of cancer, but this appears not to be a general phenomenon (Broecker et al., 2016b) . As shown for the koalas, ERVs can confer immunity to viral infections (Feschotte and Gilbert, 2012) .
A related ERV, HERV-H, was shown to produce an RNA that keeps early embryonic cells pluripotent and even revert adult cells to regain pluripotency (Grow et al., 2015) . Thus, the role of ERVs may be more complex than we presently know.
Transposable elements and REs that lost the ability of cellular transmission by deletion of the coat protein majorly contribute to genetic complexity of host cells. They are "locked" inside the cells and are major drivers of the increase of genetic complexity (Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). One could speculate that these intracellular elements are replicationincompetent retroviruses lacking coats (Lander et al., 2001) . Bats transmit viruses such as Ebola and SARS coronavirus without suffering from disease (Beltz, 2018) . Even RNA viruses such as Bornaviruses have been shown to integrate by illegitimate reverse transcription, possibly also supplying immunity against superinfection (Katzourakis and Gifford, 2010) .
There are two prominent events that significantly contributed to the success of life and the formation of cells. Both of them are associated with gene reduction. This phenomenon may play a role for the evolution of viruses from autonomous to parasitic lifestyles. In the 1960s Lynn Margulis proposed an extracellular origin for mitochondria (Margulis, 1970 (Margulis, , 1993 ). An ancestral cell, perhaps an archaeon, was infected by an anaerobic bacterium, which gave rise to mitochondria. Similarly, cyanobacteria formed the chloroplasts in modern plant cells. Mitochondria arose around 1.45 billion years ago (BYA) (Embley and Martin, 2006) . Mitochondria and chloroplasts are the most striking examples for a change in lifestyle from autonomous bacteria to endosymbionts. This transition is often considered as extremely rare and a hallmark of evolution of life on our planet. However, there are many other obligate intracellular parasites such as Rickettsia, Chlamydia trachomatis, Coxiella burnetii (the causative agent of Q fever), Mycobacterium leprae, M. tuberculosis, and M. mycoides (Beare et al., 2006) .
The change of lifestyle of the endosymbionts in the two cases of mitochondria and chloroplasts is striking. Both of them drastically reduced their genetic make-up. Mitochondria contain less than 37 genes, left from the original about 3,000 genes. Is endogenization of retroviruses, the ERVs, which are integrated into germline cells, related to endosymbiosis? Are these endosymbionts models for the transition from autonomous lifestyle to a parasitic life-which may have taken place with viruses? A more recent typical example for a reductive evolution are Rickettsia. These bacteria were assumed for some time to be viruses because of their obligatory intracellular parasitic existence. Rickettsia have evolved from autonomously replicating bacteria. Reductive evolution of endosymbionts can yield bacteria with tiny genomes on the expense of autonomous extracellular life. Their genomes are 1.11 mio bp in length with about 834 protein-coding genes, and loss of 24% by reductive evolution (Ogata et al., 2001) . Rickettsia may have some relationship with cyanobacteria, which are considered as the major symbionts.
Can one speculate that viruses may have been autonomous entities initially? Viroids may have undergone transition from autonomy to parasites, just as shown for mitochondria, chloroplasts or Rickettsia? To which extent have viruses been autonomous and independent of cellular metabolisms originally -and contributed to the origin of cells? Could they only later have lost their autonomy and become parasitic?
Viruses are minimalistic in their composition and must have undergone stringent gene reductions (Flint, 2015) . How small can their genomes become? Most coding RNA viruses still contain regulatory elements, ncRNA at the 3 and 5 terminal regions for ribosomal entry, protein synthesis, transcriptional regulation, and others.
A subgroup of retroviruses is an interesting example in respect to simultaneous loss and gain of genetic information. The oncogenic retroviruses or tumorviruses can recombine with cellular genes which under the promoters of retroviruses can become oncogenes and drivers of cancer. About a hundred oncogenes have been selected for in the laboratories and studied over decades for understanding the molecular mechanisms of cancer. Selection for growth advantages of the host cells led to the discovery of the fastest growth-promoting oncogenes we know today, such as Ras, Raf, ErbB or Myc, which are in part successful targets for anticancer drugs (Moelling et al., 1984) .
These oncogenes were in most cases taken up by the retroviruses at the expense of structural (gag), replicating (pol) or envelope (env) genes, and are often expressed as fusion proteins with Gag. Thus, oncogenic retroviruses are obligatory intracellular defective viruses and were selected for in the laboratory by researchers for the oncogenes with the most potent growth promoting ability. They need the supply of replicatory genes in trans from co-infecting helper viruses to infect other cells (Flint, 2015) . Retroviruses are able to pick up cellular genes, transfer and integrate them into neighboring cells. Some strains of Rous sarcoma virus maintain replication competent when carrying the cell-derived src (for sarcoma) oncogene encoding a protein of 536 amino acids that apparently can fit into the retroviral particle along with the full-size viral genome (Broecker et al., 2016a) . Spatial reasons may have influenced the formation of oncogenic retroviruses and limited their size and thereby led to their defective phenotypes.
There are indications that the uncontrolled activity of (retro)transposons in germline cells can result in diseases such as male infertility -presumably by "error catastrophe, " caused by too many transposition events. In mammals, piRNAs tame transposon activity by means of the RNase H activity of PIWI proteins during spermatogenesis (Girard et al., 2006) .
Only a minority of viruses are pathogens; most of them do not cause diseases. On the contrary, they are most important as drivers of evolution, as transmitters of genetic material, as innovative agents. In particular, the RNA viruses are the most innovative ones. Some of them are pathogenic and dangerous, such as HIV or influenza virus, or viroids in plants. RNA viruses are able to change so rapidly that the host immune system is unable to counteract the infection. Pathogenicity arises when environmental conditions change, for instance, when a virus enters a new organism or species.
Increase of cellular complexity by viruses is an important feature of evolution. Such major evolutionary changes are recently taken as arguments against the evolutionary theory by Charles Darwin who considered gradual changes, small increments by mutations as the main basis for selection and evolution. New criticism is addressing this thinking, considering larger changes as evolutionary drivers. Such changes arise by many complex phenomena such as endosymbiosis, infection by prokaryotes, viruses and fungi, recombination of genes, HGT, infections, sex. Dramatic changes such as endosymbiosis or pathogen infections extend Darwin's concept of evolution.
There are numerous examples for the contribution of viruses to the evolution of life since at least as long as 550 MYA (Hayward, 2017) . But genetic noise through random mutations does not allow us to go back to the origin of life. It may not be impossible that the earliest compartment was indistinguishable, either a pre-cell or a pre-virus. By analogy one may speculate that at some point autonomous viruses gave up independence for an obligatory intracellular life -as has been described for mitochondria and chloroplasts but also intracellular bacteria such as Rickettsia. This speculation is based on the concept that early life must have started simple and with high genetic variability and then became more complex. But complexity can be given up for a less energy consuming lifestyle with small genomes and high speed of replication (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . Therefore, the question may be repeated: "Are viruses our oldest ancestors?" Some fossil life can be partially reproduced in vitro by Spiegelman's Monster and Eigen's follow-up experiments, explaining the great surviving potential of simple ncRNA.
Viruses can be pathogens, but their recognition as primarily causing diseases is wrong. This notion is based on the history of viruses in medicine, as explained in a book entitled "Viruses: More Friends Than Foes" (Moelling, 2017) . The scenario described here focuses on viruses as drivers of evolution.
The early RNA world gained interest 20-30 years ago as evidenced by the references provided above. Surprisingly, there are scientists who still believe in the "pansperm hypothesis" and think that retroviruses are of extraterrestric origin (Steele et al., 2018) . The recent interest in the origin of life arose from the newly discovered exoplanets whose number increases daily -and which may be as numerous as 10 25 . Thus, pure statistics make some people believe that there is extraterrestrial life.
The extraterrestric life is mimicked in laboratories on Earth with many assumptions -perhaps this overview stimulates some thinking. The discussion presented here should be taken as concept about simple replicating and evolving entities possibly arising from different building blocks in other environments, with structure being more relevant than sequence. | What are some examples of autonomous bacteria that lost their independence and became intracellular parasites or endosymbionts? | 1,178 | mitochondria, chloroplasts, Rickettsia | 1,444 |
1,690 | Viruses and Evolution – Viruses First? A Personal Perspective
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433886/
SHA: f3b9fc0f8e0a431366196d3e835e1ec368b379d1
Authors: Moelling, Karin; Broecker, Felix
Date: 2019-03-19
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00523
License: cc-by
Abstract: The discovery of exoplanets within putative habitable zones revolutionized astrobiology in recent years. It stimulated interest in the question about the origin of life and its evolution. Here, we discuss what the roles of viruses might have been at the beginning of life and during evolution. Viruses are the most abundant biological entities on Earth. They are present everywhere, in our surrounding, the oceans, the soil and in every living being. Retroviruses contributed to about half of our genomic sequences and to the evolution of the mammalian placenta. Contemporary viruses reflect evolution ranging from the RNA world to the DNA-protein world. How far back can we trace their contribution? Earliest replicating and evolving entities are the ribozymes or viroids fulfilling several criteria of life. RNA can perform many aspects of life and influences our gene expression until today. The simplest structures with non-protein-coding information may represent models of life built on structural, not genetic information. Viruses today are obligatory parasites depending on host cells. Examples of how an independent lifestyle might have been lost include mitochondria, chloroplasts, Rickettsia and others, which used to be autonomous bacteria and became intracellular parasites or endosymbionts, thereby losing most of their genes. Even in vitro the loss of genes can be recapitulated all the way from coding to non-coding RNA. Furthermore, the giant viruses may indicate that there is no sharp border between living and non-living entities but an evolutionary continuum. Here, it is discussed how viruses can lose and gain genes, and that they are essential drivers of evolution. This discussion may stimulate the thinking about viruses as early possible forms of life. Apart from our view “viruses first”, there are others such as “proteins first” and “metabolism first.”
Text: Mycoplasma mycoides by systematic deletion of individual genes resulted in a synthetic minimal genome of 473 genes (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Can one consider simpler living entities?
There are elements with zero genes that fulfill many criteria for early life: ribozymes, catalytic RNAs closely related to viroids. They were recovered in vitro from 10 15 molecules (aptamers), 220 nucleotides in length, by 10 rounds of selection. Among the many RNA species present in this collection of quasispecies RNAs were catalytically active members, enzymatically active ribozymes. The sequence space for 220-mer RNAs is about 3 × 10 132 (Eigen, 1971; Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Brackett and Dieckmann, 2006) .
The selected ribozymes were able to replicate, cleave, join, and form peptide bonds. They can polymerize progeny chemically, allow for mutations to occur and can evolve. One molecule serves as catalyst, the other one as substrate. Replication of ribozymes was demonstrated in the test tube (Lincoln and Joyce, 2009) . Ribozymes can form peptide bonds between amino acids (Zhang and Cech, 1997) . Thus, small peptides were available by ribozyme activity. Consequently, an RNA modification has been proposed as peptide nucleic acid (PNA), with more stable peptide bonds instead of phosphodiester bonds (Zhang and Cech, 1997; Joyce, 2002) . Replication of RNA molecules can be performed chemically from RNA without polymerase enzymes. In addition, deoxyribozymes can form from ribonucleotides (Wilson and Szostak, 1999) . Thus, DNA can arise from RNA chemically, without the key protein enzyme, the reverse transcriptase.
An entire living world is possible from non-coding RNA (ncRNA) before evolution of the genetic code and protein enzymes. Ribozymes naturally consist of circular single-stranded RNAs (Orgel, 2004) . They lack the genetic triplet code and do not encode proteins. Instead, they exhibit structural information by hairpin-loops that form hydrogen bonds between incomplete double strands, and loops free to interact with other molecules. They represent a quasispecies in which many species of RNA may form, such as ribozymes, tRNA-like molecules, and other ncRNAs. RNAs within such a pool can bind amino acids. Ninety different amino acids have been identified on the Murchison meteorite found in Australia, while on Earth only about 20 of them are used for protein synthesis (Meierhenrich, 2008) . Where formation of ribozymes occurred on the early Earth is a matter of speculation. The hydrothermal vents such as black smokers in the deep ocean are possibilities where life may have started (Martin et al., 2008) . There, temperature gradients and clay containing minerals such as magnesium or manganese are available. Pores or niches offer possibilities for concentration of building blocks, which is required for chemical reactions to occur. Interestingly, also ice is a candidate for ribozyme formation and chemical reactions. Ice crystals displace the biomolecules into the liquid phase, which leads to concentration, creating a quasicellular compartmentalization where de novo synthesis of nucleotide precursors is promoted. There, RNA and ribozymes can emerge, which are capable of self-replication (Attwater et al., 2010) .
tRNA-amino acid complexes can find RNAs as "mRNAs." Such interactions could have contributed to the evolution of the genetic code. This sequence of events can lead to primitive ribosome precursors. Ribozymes are the essential catalytic elements in ribosomes: "The ribosome is a ribozyme" (Cech, 2000) , supplemented with about a hundred scaffold proteins later during evolution. The proteins have structural functions and contribute indirectly to enzymatic activity. Are these ribosomebound ribozymes fossils from the early Earth? Small peptides can be formed by ribozymes before ribosomes evolved, whereby single or dimeric amino acids may originate from the universe (Meierhenrich, 2008) .
Small peptides with basic amino acids can increase the catalytic activity of ribozymes as shown in vitro (Müller et al., 1994) . Such proteins are known as RNA-binding proteins from RNA viruses that protect the RNA genome, with motifs such as RAPRKKG of the nucleocapsid NCp7 of HIV (Schmalzbauer et al., 1996) . Peptides can enhance the catalytic activity of ribozymes up to a 100-fold (Müller et al., 1994) . Such peptides of RNA viruses serve as chaperones that remove higher ordered RNA structures, allowing for more efficient interaction of RNA molecules and increasing transcription rates of RNA polymerases (Müller et al., 1994) . Ribonucleoproteins may have also been functionally important during the evolution of ribosomes (Harish and Caetano-Anolles, 2012) .
These pre-ribosomal structures are also similar to precursorlike structures of retroviruses. Reverse transcription can be performed by ribozymes chemically. This action does not necessarily require a protein polymerase such as the reverse transcriptase. Similarly, deoxyribonucleotides can arise by removal of an oxygen without the need of a protein enzyme (a reductase) as today, and allow for DNA polymerization (Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Joyce, 2002) . The same elements of the precursors for ribosomes are also building blocks of retroviruses, which may have a similar evolutionary origin (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . tRNAs serve as primers for the reverse transcriptase, and the sequence of promoters of transposable elements are derived from tRNAs (Lander et al., 2001) . The ribozymes developed into more complex self-cleaving group II introns with insertion of genes encoding a reverse transcriptase and additional proteins (Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) (Figure 1) .
It came as a surprise that the genomes of almost all species are rich in ncDNA, transcribed into ncRNAs but not encoding proteins, as evidenced, for instance, by the "Encyclopedia of DNA Elements" (ENCODE) project. ncDNA amounts to more than 98% of the human DNA genome (Deveson et al., 2017) . Higher organisms tend to have more non-coding information, which allows for more complex modes of gene regulation. The ncRNAs are regulators of the protein-coding sequences. Highly complex organisms such as humans typically have a high number of ncRNA and regulatory mechanisms. ncRNA can range from close to zero in the smallest bacteria such as Pelagibacter ubique to about 98% in the human genome.
RNA viruses such as the retrovirus HIV harbor ncRNAs for gene regulation such as the trans-activating response element (TAR), the binding site for the Tat protein for early viral gene expression. Tat has a highly basic domain comprising mostly Lys and Arg residues, resembling other RNA binding proteins. ncRNA also serves on viral RNA genomes as ribosomal entry sites, primer binding sites or packaging signals. DNA synthesis depends on RNA synthesis as initial event, with RNA primers as starters for DNA replication, inside of cells as FIGURE 1 | A compartment is shown with essential components of life as discussed in the text. Non-coding RNA (ncRNA), ribozymes or viroids, can perform many steps for life without protein-coding genes but only by structural information. Individual amino acids are indicated as black dots and may be available on Earth from the universe. DNA may have existed before retroviruses. The compartment can be interpreted as pre-virus or pre-cell. Viroid, green; RNA, red; DNA, black.
well as during retroviral replication, proving a requirement of RNA (Flint, 2015) .
The number of mammalian protein-coding genes is about 20,000. Surprisingly, this is only a fifth of the number of genes of bread wheat (Appels et al., 2018) . Tulips, maize and other plants also have larger genomes, indicating that the number of genes does not necessarily reflect the complexity of an organism. What makes these plant genomes so large, is still an open question. Could the giant genomes possibly be the result to breeding of plants by farmers or gardeners?
According to Szostak there are molecules which appear like relics from the RNA world such as acetyl-CoA or vitamin B12, both of which are bound to a ribonucleotide for no obvious reason -was it "forgotten" to be removed? (Roberts and Szostak, 1997; Szostak et al., 2001; Szostak, 2011) . Perhaps the connected RNA serves as structural stabilizer. Lipid vesicles could have formed the first compartments and enclosed ribozymes, tRNAs with selected amino acids, and RNA which became mRNA. Is this a pre-cell or pre-virus (Figure 1) ? Patel et al. (2015) demonstrated that the building blocks of life, ribonucleotides, lipids and amino acids, can be formed from C, H, O, P, N, S in a "one pot" synthesis. This study can be regarded as a follow-up study of the classical Urey-Miller in vitro synthesis of biomolecules (Miller, 1953; Miller and Urey, 1959) . Transition from the RNA to the DNA world was promoted by the formation of the reverse transcriptase. The enzyme was first described in retroviruses but it is almost ubiquitous and found in numerous cellular species, many of which with unknown functions (Simon and Zimmerly, 2008; Lescot et al., 2016) . It is an important link between the RNA and the DNA worlds. The name reverse transcriptase is historical and irritating because it is the "real" transcriptase during the transition from the RNA to the DNA world. Similarly, the ribonuclease H (RNase H) is an essential enzyme of retroviruses (Mölling et al., 1971) . The RNase H turned out to be one of the five most frequent and ancient proteins (Ma et al., 2008 ) that belongs to a superfamily of more than sixty different unique representatives and 152 families with numerous functions (Majorek et al., 2014) .
Some of the many tRNAs can become loaded with amino acids. There are viruses containing tRNA-like structures (TLS), resembling these early RNAs (Dreher, 2009) . The TLS of these viruses typically bind to a single amino acid. TLS-viruses include plant viruses, such as Turnip yellow mosaic virus, in Peanut clump virus, Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), and Brome mosaic virus. Only half a tRNA is found in Narnaviruses of fungi. The amino acids known to be components of tRNA-like viruses are valine, histidine and tyrosine. The structures were also designated as "mimicry, " enhancing translation (Dreher, 2009 (Dreher, , 2010 . They look like "frozen" precursor-like elements for protein synthesis. This combination of a partial tRNA linked to one amino acid can be interpreted as an evolutionary early step toward protein synthesis, trapped in a viral element.
Ribozymes are related to the protein-free viroids. Viroids are virus-like elements that belong to the virosphere, the world of viruses (Chela-Flores, 1994) . Viroids lack protein coats and therefore were initially not designated as viruses but virus-like viroids when they were discovered in 1971 by Theodor Diener. He described viroids as "living fossils" (Diener, 2016) (Figure 2) .
From infected potatoes, Diener isolated the Potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd) whose genome was about a 100-fold smaller than those of viruses known at that time. The viroids known today are ranging from 246 to 467 nucleotides. They contain circular single-stranded RNA, are protein-free and self-replicating with no genetic information, but only structural FIGURE 2 | Viroids are hairpin-loop structures and are shown schematically and as electron micrograph. Viroids are, like ribozymes, without genetic information and play major biological roles today in plant diseases, in carnation flowers, in liver cancer, as catalyst of protein synthesis in ribosomes and as circular regulatory RNAs, as "sponges" for other regulatory RNAs.
information in the form of hairpin-loops (Riesner et al., 1979) . They can generate copies of themselves in the appropriate environment. They were designated as the "frontiers of life" (Flores et al., 2014) .
The knowledge of virus composition was based on TMV and its crystallization by Wendell Stanley in 1935 (Pennazio and Roggero, 2000) . The genome of TMV is protein-coding singlestranded RNA of about 6,400 nucleotides that is enclosed by a rod-like protein coat. Viroids, in contrast, do not encode proteins and lack coats but they are closely related to viruses. Viroids can lose their autonomy and rely on host RNA polymerases to replicate, are capable of infecting plants and many are economically important pathogens. There are two families, the nucleus-replicating Pospiviroidae such as PSTVd and the chloroplast-replicating Avsunviroidae like the Avocado sunblotch viroid (ASBVd). Their replication requires host enzymes. Thus, autonomy is replaced by dependence on host enzymes and an intracellular lifestyle.
Most viroids are often enzymatically active ribozymes -yet they are examples that this trait can get lost as a result of changing environmental conditions. Loss of ribozyme activity is a functional, not a genetic loss. Only the nuclear variants, the Pospiviroidae, can lose their ribozyme activity and use the cellular RNase III enzyme for their replication. In contrast, the Avsunviroidae are still active hammerhead ribozymes. Thus, inside the nucleus of a host cell, the enzymatic RNA function can become unnecessary. Not genes, but a function, the catalytic activity, gets lost.
Viroids did apparently not gain genes but cooperated for a more complex lifestyle. For example, Carnation small viroid-like RNA (CarSV RNA) cooperates with a retrovirus and is accompanied by a homologous DNA generated by a reverse transcriptase. This enzyme presumably originates from a pararetrovirus of plants. Pararetroviruses package virus particles at a different stage during replication than retroviruses, the DNA, not the RNA. This unique combination between two viral elements has so far only been detected with CarSV in carnation flowers (Flores et al., 2005 (Flores et al., , 2014 . Why did such a cooperation evolve -perhaps by breeding gardeners? RNA is sensitive to degradation; therefore, genetic increase and growth of the genome may not be favorable energetically -at least not in plants. Gain of function is, in this case, cooperation.
The circular RNA (circRNA) is related to ribozymes/viroids as a chief regulator of other regulatory RNAs, a "sponge" absorbing small RNAs. Micro RNAs (miRNAs) are post-transcriptional regulators that are affected by the presence of circRNAs. circRNAs were detected in human and mouse brains and testes as well as in plants. They can bind 70 conserved miRNAs in a cell and amount up to 25,000 molecules (Hansen et al., 2013) . Their structure is reminiscent of catalytically active ribozymes.
There is an exceptional viroid that gained coding information and entered the human liver (Taylor, 2009) . The viroid is known as hepatitis delta virus (HDV). It has the smallest genome of any known animal virus of about 1,680 nucleotides. It has properties typical of viroids, since it contains circRNA, forms similar hairpin-loops and replicates in the nucleus using host enzymes. Two polymerases have to redirect their specificity from DNA to RNA to generate the HDV genome and antigenome. Both of them have ribozyme activity. In contrast to other ribozymes, HDV encodes a protein, the hepatitis delta antigen (HDVAg) that occurs in two forms, the small-HDVAg (24 kDa) supporting replication and the large-HDVAg (27 kDa) that helps virion assembly. The gene was presumably picked up from the host cell by recombination of HDV's mRNA intermediate with a host mRNA. Transmission depends on a helper virus, the Hepatitis B virus (HBV), which delivers the coat (Taylor, 2009 ) Does packaging by a helper virus protect the genome and thereby allow for a larger viroid to exist?
In plants, viroids may not be able to become bigger possibly due to their sensitivity to degradation -but they cannot become much smaller either. Only a single viroid is known that is completely composed of protein-coding RNA with triplets (AbouHaidar et al., 2014). Viroids and related replicating RNAs are error-prone replicating units and the error frequency imposes a certain minimal size onto them, as they would otherwise become extinct. This mechanism has been described as "error catastrophe, " which prevents survival (Eigen, 1971 (Eigen, , 2013 . The viroids and related RNAs are the smallest known replicons. Smaller ones would become extinct in the absence of repair systems.
In summary, RNA can catalyze many reactions. Protein enzymes which may have evolved later have higher catalytic activities. Ribozymes are carriers of information, but do not require coding genes. Information is stored in their sequence and structure. Thus, replication of an initial RNA is followed by flow of information, from DNA to RNA to protein, as described the Central Dogma (Crick, 1968) . Even an information flow from protein to DNA has been described for some archaeal proteins (Béguin et al., 2015) . The DNA-protein world contains numerous ncRNAs with key functions. ncRNA may serve as a model compound for the origin of life on other planets. Hereby not the chemical composition of this molecule is of prime relevance, but its simplicity and multifunctionality. Furthermore, RNA is software and hardware in a single molecule, which makes it unique in our world. There are other scenarios besides the here discussed "virus-first, " such as "protein-first", "metabolism-fist" or the "lipid world" (Segré et al., 2001; Andras and Andras, 2005; Vasas et al., 2010; Moelling, 2012) . Some of these alternative concepts were built on phylogenomics, the reconstruction of the tree of life by genome sequencing (Delsuc et al., 2005) . Surprisingly, it was Sir Francis Crick, one of the discoverers of the DNA double-helix, who stated that he would not be surprised about a world completely built of RNA. A similar prediction was made by Walter Gilbert (Crick, 1968; Gilbert, 1986) . What a vision! Our world was almost 50 years later defined as "RNAprotein" world (Altman, 2013) . One can speculate our world was built of ribozymes or viroids, which means "viruses first."
ncRNAs appear as relics from the past RNA world, before DNA, the genetic code and proteins evolved. However, ncRNA is essential in our biological DNA world today. It is possible to produce such ncRNA today in the test tube by loss of genic information from protein-coding RNA. This reduction to ncRNA was demonstrated in vitro with phage RNA. Phage Qβ genomic RNA, 4,217 nucleotides in length, was incubated in the presence of Qβ replicase, free nucleotides and salts, a rich milieu in the test tube. The RNA was allowed to replicate by means of the Qβ replicase. Serial transfer of aliquots to fresh medium led to ever faster replication rates and reduction of genomic size, down to 218 nucleotides of ncRNA in 74 generations. This study demonstrated that, depending on environmental conditions, an extreme gene reduction can take place. This experiment performed in 1965 was designated as "Spiegelman's Monster." Coding RNA became replicating ncRNA (Spiegelman et al., 1965; Kacian et al., 1972) ! Manfred Eigen extended this experiment and demonstrated further that a mixture containing no RNA to start with but only ribonucleotides and the Qβ replicase can under the right conditions in a test tube spontaneously generate self-replicating ncRNA. This evolved into a form similar to Spiegelman's Monster. The presence of the replicase enzyme was still necessary in these studies. Furthermore, a change in enzyme concentration and addition of short RNAs or an RNA intercalator influenced the arising RNA population (Sumper and Luce, 1975; Eigen, 2013) . Thus, the complexity of genomes depends on the environment: poor conditions lead to increased complexity and rich environments to reduced complexity.
The process demonstrated in this experiment with viral components indicates that reversion to simplicity, reduction in size, loss of genetic information and speed in replication can be major forces of life, even though this appears to be like a reversion of evolution. The experiment can perhaps be generalized from the test tube to a principle, that the most successful survivors on our planet are the viruses and microorganisms, which became the most abundant entities. Perhaps life can start from there again.
These studies raise the question of how RNA molecules can become longer, if the small polymers become smaller and smaller, replicate faster and outcompete longer ones. This may be overcome by heat flow across an open pore in submerged rocks, which concentrates replicating oligonucleotides from a constant feeding flow and selection for longer strands. This has been described for an increase from 100 to 1,000 nucleotides in vitro. RNA molecules shorter than 75 nucleotides will die out (Kreysing et al., 2015) . Could a poor environment lead to an increase of complexity? This could be tested. Ribozymes were shown to grow in size by uptake of genes, as demonstrated for HDV (Taylor, 2009 ).
An interesting recent unexpected example supporting the notion that environmental conditions influence genetic complexity, is the human gut microbiome. Its complexity increases with diverse food, while uniform rich food reduces its diversity and may lead to diseases such as obesity. Colonization of the human intestinal tract starts at birth. A few dozen bacterial and viral/phage species are conserved between individuals (core sequences) as a stable composition (Broecker et al., 2016c . Dysbiosis has been observed in several chronic diseases and in obesity, a loss of bacterial richness and diversity. Nutrition under affluent conditions with sugar-rich food contributes to obesity, which results in a significant reduction of the complexity of the microbiome. This reduction is difficult to revert (Cotillard et al., 2013; Le Chatelier et al., 2013) . The gut microbiome in human patients with obesity is reminiscent of the gene reduction described in the Spiegelman's Monster experiment: reduction of genes in a rich environment.
The reduction of the complexity of the microbiome is in part attributed to the action of phages, which under such conditions, defined as stress, lyse the bacteria. Fecal microbiota transplantation can even be replaced by soluble fractions containing phages or metabolites from the donor without bacteria (Ott et al., 2017) . Analogously, the most highly complex microbiomes are found in indigenous human tribes in Africa, which live on a broad variety of different nutrients. It is a slow process, though, to increase gut microbiota complexity by diverse nutrition. The obesity-associated microbiota that survive are fitter and more difficult to counteract. Urbanization and westernization of the diet is associated with a loss of microbial biodiversity, loss of microbial organisms and genes (Segata, 2015) .
To understand the mechanism and driving force for genome reduction, deletion rates were tested by insertion of an indicator gene into the Salmonella enterica genome. The loss of the indicator gene was monitored by serial passage in rich medium. After 1,000 generations about 25% of the deletions caused increased bacterial fitness. Deletions resulted in smaller genomes with reduced or absence of DNA repair genes (Koskiniemi et al., 2012) . Gene loss conferred a higher fitness to the bacteria under these experimental conditions.
The recently discovered mimiviruses and other giant viruses are worth considering for understanding the evolution of life with respect to the contribution of viruses. Their hosts are, for example, Acanthamoeba, Chlorella, and Coccolithus algae (Emiliania huxleyi), but also corals or sponges as discussed more recently. Mimiviruses were first discovered in cooling water towers in Bradford, United Kingdom in 2003 with about 1,000 genes, most of which unrelated to previously known genes. Mimiviruses have received attention because they contain elements that were considered hallmarks of living cells, not of viruses, such as elements required for protein synthesis, tRNAs and amino acid transferases. The mimiviruses harbor these building blocks as incomplete sets not sufficient for independent protein synthesis as bacteria or archaea can perform, preventing them from leading an autonomous life (La Scola et al., 2003 Scola et al., , 2008 . They are larger than some bacteria. Giant viruses can be looked at as being on an evolutionary path toward a cellular organism. Alternatively, they may have evolved from a cellular organism by loss of genetic information (Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015) . Giant viruses have frequently taken up genes from their hosts by horizontal gene transfer (HGT) (La Scola et al., 2008; Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015; Colson et al., 2018) . A graph on genome sizes shows that mimiviruses and bacteria overlap in size, indicating a continuous transition between viruses and bacteria and between living and non-living worlds (based on Holmes, 2011) (Figure 3) . Other giant viruses, such as megaviruses, were discovered in the ocean of Chile with 1,120 genes. Most recently the Klosneuvirus was identified in the sewage of the monastery Klosterneuburg in Austria in 2017 with 1.57 million (mio) basepairs (Mitch, 2017) . Pithovirus sibericum is the largest among giant viruses discovered to date with a diameter of 1.5 microns, a genome of 470,000 bp with 467 putative genes, 1.6 microns in length, and it is presumably 30,000 years old as it was recovered from permafrost in Siberia (Legendre et al., 2014) . The smaller Pandoraviruses with 1 micron in length have five times larger genomes, 2,500,000 bp (Philippe et al., 2013) (Figure 3) .
The giant viruses can even be hosts to smaller viruses, the virophages, reminiscent of bacteriophages, the viruses of bacteria. These virophages such as Sputnik are only 50 nm in size with 18,343 bp of circular dsDNA and 21 predicted proteincoding genes. They replicate in viral factories and consume the resources of the mimivirus, thereby destroying it. Some, virophages can even integrate into the genome of the cellular host and can be reactivated when the host is infected by giant viruses. Thus, giant viruses suggest that viruses are close to living entities or may have been alive (La Scola et al., 2008; Fischer and Hackl, 2016) . In biology it is common to distinguish between living and dead matter by the ability to synthesize proteins and replicate autonomously. The giant viruses may be considered as missing link between the two, because they harbor "almost" the protein synthesis apparatus. The transition from living to the non-living world is continuous, not separated by a sharp borderline (Figure 3) .
Viruses are not considered alive by most of the scientific community and as written in textbooks, because they cannot replicate autonomously. Yet some of the giant viruses are equipped with almost all components of the protein synthesis machinery close to bacteria suggesting that they belong to the living matter (Schulz et al., 2017) . The ribozymes may have been the earliest replicating entity. Perhaps also other viruses were initially more independent of the early Earth than they are today. As described in Figure 1 there may have been initially no major difference between an early virus or an early cell. Only later viruses may have given up their autonomous replication and became parasites -as has been described for some bacteria (see below).
Efforts have been made to identify the smallest living cell that is still autonomously replicating. Among the presumably smallest naturally occurring bacteria is Pelagibacter ubique of the SAR11 clade of bacteria (Giovannoni, 2017) , which was discovered in 1990. It is an alpha-proteobacterium with 1,389 genes present ubiquitously in all oceans. It can reach up to 10 28 free living cells in total and represents about 25% of microbial plankton cells. Very little of its DNA is non-coding. It harbors podophage-type phages, designated as "pelagiphage" (Zhao et al., 2013) . This small bacterium was designated as the most common organism on the planet. Why is it so successful? This autonomous bacterium is smaller than some parasitic giant viruses. Craig Venter, who first succeeded in sequencing the human genome, tried to minimize the putative smallest genome of a living species, from Mycoplasma mycoides, a parasitic bacterium that lives in ruminants (Gibson et al., 2008 (Gibson et al., , 2010 . His group synthesized a genome of 531,000 bp with 473 genes, 149 of them (32%) with unknown functions (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Among the smallest parasitic living organisms is Nanoarchaeum equitans. It is a thermophile archaeon which lives at 80 • C and at pH 6 with 2% salt (Huber et al., 2003) . Its genome has a size of 490,000 bp and encodes 540 genes. N. equitans is an obligate symbiont of a bigger archaeon, Ignicoccus riding on it as on a horse, hence the name (Huber et al., 2003) .
The world of viruses covers a range of three logs in size of their genomes: from zero genes to about 2,500 genes amounting to about 2,500,000 bp of DNA. The zero-gene viroids are about 300 bases in length (Figure 3) .
The virosphere is the most successful reservoir of biological entities on our planet in terms of numbers of particles, speed of replication, growth rates, and sequence space. There are about 10 33 viruses on our planet and they are present in every single existing species (Suttle, 2005) .
There is no living species without viruses! Viruses also occur freely in the oceans, in the soil, in clouds up to the stratosphere and higher, to at least 300 km in altitude. They populate the human intestine, birth canal, and the outside of the body as protective layer against microbial populations. Microbes contain phages that are activated during stress conditions such as lack of nutrients, change in temperatures, lack of space and other changes of environmental conditions.
One of the most earth-shaking papers of this century was the publication of the human genome sequence (Lander et al., 2001) . About half, possibly even two-thirds of the sequence are composed of more or less complete endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) and related retroelements (REs) (de Koning et al., 2011) . REs amplify via copy-and-paste mechanisms involving a reverse transcriptase step from an RNA intermediate into DNA. In addition, DNA transposable elements (TEs) move by a cutand-paste mechanism. The origin of REs is being discussed as remnants of ancient retroviral germline infections that became evolutionarily fixed in the genome. About 450,000 human ERV (HERV) elements constitute about 8% of the human genome consisting of hallmark retroviral elements like the gag, pol, env genes and flanking long terminal repeats (LTR) that act as promoters (Lander et al., 2001) . Howard Temin, one of the discoverers of the reverse transcriptase, in 1985 already described endogenous retrovirus-like elements, which he estimated to about 10% of the human and mouse genome sequence (Temin, 1985) . The actual number is about 45% as estimated today (Lander et al., 2001) . In some genes such as the Protein Kinase Inhibitor B (PKIB) gene we determined about 70% retrovirusrelated sequences (Moelling and Broecker, 2015) . Is there a limit? Could it have been 100%? Retroviruses are estimated to have entered the lineage of the mammalian genome 550 million years ago (MYA) (Hayward, 2017) . Older ERV sequences may exist but are unrecognizable today due to the accumulation of mutations.
ERVs undergo mutations, deletions or homologous recombination events with large deletions and can become as short as solo LTR elements, which are a few hundred bp in length -the left-overs from full-length retroviral genomes of about 10,000 bp. The LTR promoters can deregulate neighboring genes. Homologous recombination events may be considered as gene loss or gene reduction events. It is the assumption that the ERVs, which were no longer needed for host cell defense, were no longer selected for by evolution and consequently deleted as unnecessary consumers of energy.
Eugene Koonin points out that infection and integration are unique events occurring at a fast pace, while loss and gene reduction may take much longer time frames (Wolf and Koonin, 2013) .
A frequent gene reduction of eukaryotic genomes is the loss of the viral envelope protein encoded by the env gene. Without a coat, retroviruses can no longer leave the cell and infect other cells. They lose mobility and become obligatory intracellular elements. Helper viruses can supply envelope proteins in trans and mobilize the viruses. TEs or REs can be regarded as examples of coat-free intracellular virus relics -or could it have been the other way round, perhaps precursors of full-length retroviruses?
These elements can be amplified intracellularly and modify the host genomes by integration with the potential danger of gene disruption and genetic changes. REs can lead to gene duplications and pseudogene development, with one copy for stable conservation of acquired functions and the other one for innovations (Cotton and Page, 2005) . Such duplications constitute large amounts of mammalian genomes (Zhang, 2003) . Retroviruses have an RNase H moiety duplication, one of which serves as a catalytically inactive linker between the RT polymerase and the enzymatically active RNase H (Xiong and Eickbush, 1990; Malik and Eickbush, 2001; Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) . This gene duplication dates back to 500 mio years (Cotton and Page, 2005) .
Gene duplications are a common cause of cancer, which often occurs only in the genome of the cancer cell itself, less affecting offsprings. Myc, Myb, ErbB2, Ras, and Raf are oncogenes amplified in diverse types of human cancers (Vogelstein and Kinzler, 2002) . The ability of retroviruses to integrate makes them distinct from endosymbionts which stay separate. Yet the net result is very similar, acquisition of new genetic information, which is transmitted to the next generation, if the germline is infected and endogenization of the virus occurred.
Viral integration is not limited to eukaryotic cells but also a mechanism in prokaryotes for maintenance of the lysogenic state of phages inside bacteria.
Also, for other eukaryotic viruses such as HBV, the envelope surface antigen BHsAg can be deleted, which leads to an obligatory intracellular life style for the virus, which especially in the presence of HCV promotes cancer (Yang et al., 2016) .
HIV has been shown to rapidly lose one of its auxiliary genes, nef, originally for negative factor. The gene was lost within a rather low number of passages of the virus grown under tissue culture conditions by selection for high virus titer producing cells. Deletion of nef resulted in a significant increase of the virus titer in culture -hence the name. The nef gene product was of no need inside tissue culture cells, rather it was inhibitory for replication. However, it is essential for pathogenicity in animals, and subsequently nef was reinterpreted as "necessary factor" (Flint, 2015) .
Also, the human hosts of HIV can lose a significant terminal portion of a seven transmembrane receptor in lymphocytes, the primary target cell for HIV entry and for virus uptake. This molecule, the CCR5 cytokine receptor is truncated by 32 carboxy-terminal amino acids (CCR5-32), disabling the receptor functionally. The allele frequency of the mutant CCR5-32 mutant is about 10% in the European population, making these people resistant to HIV infections (Solloch et al., 2017) . This gene loss in Europeans has been shown to make the individuals resistant not only against HIV infection but also against malaria. This may have been the selective pressure in the past before HIV/AIDS arose. No side effect for humans lacking this gene has been described (Galvani and Slatkin, 2003) .
Viruses have been proven to be drivers of evolution (Villarreal and Witzany, 2010) , including the human genome, which by at least 45% is composed of sequences related to retroviruses. In addition, endogenized retroviruses supplied the syncytin genes that are essential for the development of the mammalian placenta, and allowed the growth of embryos without its rejection by the maternal immune system (Dupressoir et al., 2012) . Thus, the same property which causes immunodeficiency in HIV-infected patients and leads to AIDS causes syncytia formation, cell fusion after infection by a retrovirus. Viruses have also been proposed to be at the origin of the evolution of adaptive immunity (Villarreal, 2009 ). Thus, viruses shaped genomes by supplying essential genes and mechanisms.
Endogenization of retroviruses has occurred in the mammalian genomes for at least 550 mio years (Hayward, 2017) . If the integrated ERVs did not provide any selective advantage, they deteriorated and accumulated mutations with loss of function. This was directly proven by reconstruction of an infectious retrovirus from the consensus sequence of 9 defective endogenous virus sequences, designated as Phoenix. The virus was expressed from a constructed synthetic DNA clone in cell culture and formed virus particles identified by high resolution microscopic analysis (Dewannieux and Heidmann, 2013) .
The koalas in Australia are currently undergoing endogenization of a retrovirus (koala retrovirus, KoRV) in "real time" and demonstrate possible consequences for immunity. In the early 1900s, some individuals were transferred to islands, including Kangaroo Island, close to the Australian mainland for repopulation purposes, as koalas were threatened to become extinct. Today, the majority of the koala population is infected by KoRV, which is closely related to the Gibbon ape leukemia virus (GALV). Yet, koalas isolated on Kangaroo Island are KoRV negative, which allows dating the introduction of KoRV into the koala population to about one hundred years ago. Many of the infected koalas fell ill and died, yet some populations became resistant within about 100 years, corresponding to about 10 generations. The koalas likely developed resistance due to the integrated DNA proviruses. The retrovirus is transmitted as exogenous as well as endogenous virus, similar to the Jaagsiekte sheep retrovirus (JSRV), whereby the endogenized viruses protect with a viral gene product, such as Env, against de novo infections by "superinfection exclusion" (Tarlinton, 2012) . The contribution of retroviruses to the antiviral defense is striking, since all retroviral genes have analogous genes in the siRNA/RNAi defense mechanism of eukaryotic cells (Moelling et al., 2006) .
Retroviruses can protect against infection by other related viruses, for example, by expressing Env proteins that block cellsurface receptors (Villarreal, 2011) . A comparable mechanism protects bacterial cells against DNA phages, by integrated phage DNA fragments that are transcribed into mRNA and hybridize to incoming new DNA phages and thereby lead to their destruction by hybrid-specific nucleases, CRISPR/Cas immunity (Charpentier and Doudna, 2013) . It is often not realized that immunity acquisition in bacteria and mammalian cells follow analogous mechanisms (Figure 4) .
Integration of retroviruses normally occurs in somatic cells after infection as an obligatory step during the viral life cycle. Infection of germline cells can lead to transmission to the next generation and ultimately result in inherited resistance. Endogenized retroviruses likely caused resistance FIGURE 4 | Viruses protect against viruses: retroviruses protect a cell against a new infection by a similar virus designated as "superinfection exclusion" or viral interference. This is mediated by viral gene products such as proteins or nucleic acids. Similarly, phages protect against phages: superinfection of bacteria is prevented by CRISPR/Cas RNA originating from previous infections. The mechanisms of defense against viruses and phages are analogous. Protection by viruses or phages against superinfections represents cellular defense and acquired immunity. The four examples are discussed in the text.
to the exogenous counterparts. Similarly, resistance to Simian Immune Deficiency virus (SIV) in some monkey species may be explained by endogenization (Li et al., 2017 (Li et al., , 2018 . In the case of phages and their prokaryotic hosts the mechanism is described as CRISPR/Cas, which follow analogous principles of "endogenization" of incoming genetic material for subsequent exclusion.
One may speculate that HIV may also eventually become endogenized into the human genome. There is some evidence that HIV can infect human germline cells and can be transmitted to the embryonic genome (Wang et al., 2011) . How long this may take is not known -10 generations?
The loss of function of ERVs can occur by mutations, deletions of the env or other genes and ultimately all coding genes by homologous recombination, leaving behind only one LTR. The number of retrovirus-like elements add up to about 450,000, corresponding to 8% of the human genome (Lander et al., 2001; Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). The promoter regions were analyzed for their contribution to cancer by activating neighboring genes -as a consequence of a former retrovirus infection. Indeed, activated cellular genes by "downstream promotion" were identified in animal studies with activation of the myc gene as one of many examples, leading to chronic, not acute development of cancer (Ott et al., 2013) . As a general mechanism for human cancer today the LTRs are, however, not identified as a major culprit. Most of the ERVs we find today have been integrated during evolution in introns or other regions where their presence is relatively harmless. Did the other ones result in death of the carriers which disappeared? The effects of LTRs on the expression levels of neighboring host genes was studied with the endogenous human virus, HERV-K, as a possible cause of cancer, but this appears not to be a general phenomenon (Broecker et al., 2016b) . As shown for the koalas, ERVs can confer immunity to viral infections (Feschotte and Gilbert, 2012) .
A related ERV, HERV-H, was shown to produce an RNA that keeps early embryonic cells pluripotent and even revert adult cells to regain pluripotency (Grow et al., 2015) . Thus, the role of ERVs may be more complex than we presently know.
Transposable elements and REs that lost the ability of cellular transmission by deletion of the coat protein majorly contribute to genetic complexity of host cells. They are "locked" inside the cells and are major drivers of the increase of genetic complexity (Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). One could speculate that these intracellular elements are replicationincompetent retroviruses lacking coats (Lander et al., 2001) . Bats transmit viruses such as Ebola and SARS coronavirus without suffering from disease (Beltz, 2018) . Even RNA viruses such as Bornaviruses have been shown to integrate by illegitimate reverse transcription, possibly also supplying immunity against superinfection (Katzourakis and Gifford, 2010) .
There are two prominent events that significantly contributed to the success of life and the formation of cells. Both of them are associated with gene reduction. This phenomenon may play a role for the evolution of viruses from autonomous to parasitic lifestyles. In the 1960s Lynn Margulis proposed an extracellular origin for mitochondria (Margulis, 1970 (Margulis, , 1993 ). An ancestral cell, perhaps an archaeon, was infected by an anaerobic bacterium, which gave rise to mitochondria. Similarly, cyanobacteria formed the chloroplasts in modern plant cells. Mitochondria arose around 1.45 billion years ago (BYA) (Embley and Martin, 2006) . Mitochondria and chloroplasts are the most striking examples for a change in lifestyle from autonomous bacteria to endosymbionts. This transition is often considered as extremely rare and a hallmark of evolution of life on our planet. However, there are many other obligate intracellular parasites such as Rickettsia, Chlamydia trachomatis, Coxiella burnetii (the causative agent of Q fever), Mycobacterium leprae, M. tuberculosis, and M. mycoides (Beare et al., 2006) .
The change of lifestyle of the endosymbionts in the two cases of mitochondria and chloroplasts is striking. Both of them drastically reduced their genetic make-up. Mitochondria contain less than 37 genes, left from the original about 3,000 genes. Is endogenization of retroviruses, the ERVs, which are integrated into germline cells, related to endosymbiosis? Are these endosymbionts models for the transition from autonomous lifestyle to a parasitic life-which may have taken place with viruses? A more recent typical example for a reductive evolution are Rickettsia. These bacteria were assumed for some time to be viruses because of their obligatory intracellular parasitic existence. Rickettsia have evolved from autonomously replicating bacteria. Reductive evolution of endosymbionts can yield bacteria with tiny genomes on the expense of autonomous extracellular life. Their genomes are 1.11 mio bp in length with about 834 protein-coding genes, and loss of 24% by reductive evolution (Ogata et al., 2001) . Rickettsia may have some relationship with cyanobacteria, which are considered as the major symbionts.
Can one speculate that viruses may have been autonomous entities initially? Viroids may have undergone transition from autonomy to parasites, just as shown for mitochondria, chloroplasts or Rickettsia? To which extent have viruses been autonomous and independent of cellular metabolisms originally -and contributed to the origin of cells? Could they only later have lost their autonomy and become parasitic?
Viruses are minimalistic in their composition and must have undergone stringent gene reductions (Flint, 2015) . How small can their genomes become? Most coding RNA viruses still contain regulatory elements, ncRNA at the 3 and 5 terminal regions for ribosomal entry, protein synthesis, transcriptional regulation, and others.
A subgroup of retroviruses is an interesting example in respect to simultaneous loss and gain of genetic information. The oncogenic retroviruses or tumorviruses can recombine with cellular genes which under the promoters of retroviruses can become oncogenes and drivers of cancer. About a hundred oncogenes have been selected for in the laboratories and studied over decades for understanding the molecular mechanisms of cancer. Selection for growth advantages of the host cells led to the discovery of the fastest growth-promoting oncogenes we know today, such as Ras, Raf, ErbB or Myc, which are in part successful targets for anticancer drugs (Moelling et al., 1984) .
These oncogenes were in most cases taken up by the retroviruses at the expense of structural (gag), replicating (pol) or envelope (env) genes, and are often expressed as fusion proteins with Gag. Thus, oncogenic retroviruses are obligatory intracellular defective viruses and were selected for in the laboratory by researchers for the oncogenes with the most potent growth promoting ability. They need the supply of replicatory genes in trans from co-infecting helper viruses to infect other cells (Flint, 2015) . Retroviruses are able to pick up cellular genes, transfer and integrate them into neighboring cells. Some strains of Rous sarcoma virus maintain replication competent when carrying the cell-derived src (for sarcoma) oncogene encoding a protein of 536 amino acids that apparently can fit into the retroviral particle along with the full-size viral genome (Broecker et al., 2016a) . Spatial reasons may have influenced the formation of oncogenic retroviruses and limited their size and thereby led to their defective phenotypes.
There are indications that the uncontrolled activity of (retro)transposons in germline cells can result in diseases such as male infertility -presumably by "error catastrophe, " caused by too many transposition events. In mammals, piRNAs tame transposon activity by means of the RNase H activity of PIWI proteins during spermatogenesis (Girard et al., 2006) .
Only a minority of viruses are pathogens; most of them do not cause diseases. On the contrary, they are most important as drivers of evolution, as transmitters of genetic material, as innovative agents. In particular, the RNA viruses are the most innovative ones. Some of them are pathogenic and dangerous, such as HIV or influenza virus, or viroids in plants. RNA viruses are able to change so rapidly that the host immune system is unable to counteract the infection. Pathogenicity arises when environmental conditions change, for instance, when a virus enters a new organism or species.
Increase of cellular complexity by viruses is an important feature of evolution. Such major evolutionary changes are recently taken as arguments against the evolutionary theory by Charles Darwin who considered gradual changes, small increments by mutations as the main basis for selection and evolution. New criticism is addressing this thinking, considering larger changes as evolutionary drivers. Such changes arise by many complex phenomena such as endosymbiosis, infection by prokaryotes, viruses and fungi, recombination of genes, HGT, infections, sex. Dramatic changes such as endosymbiosis or pathogen infections extend Darwin's concept of evolution.
There are numerous examples for the contribution of viruses to the evolution of life since at least as long as 550 MYA (Hayward, 2017) . But genetic noise through random mutations does not allow us to go back to the origin of life. It may not be impossible that the earliest compartment was indistinguishable, either a pre-cell or a pre-virus. By analogy one may speculate that at some point autonomous viruses gave up independence for an obligatory intracellular life -as has been described for mitochondria and chloroplasts but also intracellular bacteria such as Rickettsia. This speculation is based on the concept that early life must have started simple and with high genetic variability and then became more complex. But complexity can be given up for a less energy consuming lifestyle with small genomes and high speed of replication (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . Therefore, the question may be repeated: "Are viruses our oldest ancestors?" Some fossil life can be partially reproduced in vitro by Spiegelman's Monster and Eigen's follow-up experiments, explaining the great surviving potential of simple ncRNA.
Viruses can be pathogens, but their recognition as primarily causing diseases is wrong. This notion is based on the history of viruses in medicine, as explained in a book entitled "Viruses: More Friends Than Foes" (Moelling, 2017) . The scenario described here focuses on viruses as drivers of evolution.
The early RNA world gained interest 20-30 years ago as evidenced by the references provided above. Surprisingly, there are scientists who still believe in the "pansperm hypothesis" and think that retroviruses are of extraterrestric origin (Steele et al., 2018) . The recent interest in the origin of life arose from the newly discovered exoplanets whose number increases daily -and which may be as numerous as 10 25 . Thus, pure statistics make some people believe that there is extraterrestrial life.
The extraterrestric life is mimicked in laboratories on Earth with many assumptions -perhaps this overview stimulates some thinking. The discussion presented here should be taken as concept about simple replicating and evolving entities possibly arising from different building blocks in other environments, with structure being more relevant than sequence. | What entities with no genes satisfy the criteria for life? | 1,179 | ribozymes, catalytic RNAs closely related to viroids | 2,433 |
1,690 | Viruses and Evolution – Viruses First? A Personal Perspective
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433886/
SHA: f3b9fc0f8e0a431366196d3e835e1ec368b379d1
Authors: Moelling, Karin; Broecker, Felix
Date: 2019-03-19
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00523
License: cc-by
Abstract: The discovery of exoplanets within putative habitable zones revolutionized astrobiology in recent years. It stimulated interest in the question about the origin of life and its evolution. Here, we discuss what the roles of viruses might have been at the beginning of life and during evolution. Viruses are the most abundant biological entities on Earth. They are present everywhere, in our surrounding, the oceans, the soil and in every living being. Retroviruses contributed to about half of our genomic sequences and to the evolution of the mammalian placenta. Contemporary viruses reflect evolution ranging from the RNA world to the DNA-protein world. How far back can we trace their contribution? Earliest replicating and evolving entities are the ribozymes or viroids fulfilling several criteria of life. RNA can perform many aspects of life and influences our gene expression until today. The simplest structures with non-protein-coding information may represent models of life built on structural, not genetic information. Viruses today are obligatory parasites depending on host cells. Examples of how an independent lifestyle might have been lost include mitochondria, chloroplasts, Rickettsia and others, which used to be autonomous bacteria and became intracellular parasites or endosymbionts, thereby losing most of their genes. Even in vitro the loss of genes can be recapitulated all the way from coding to non-coding RNA. Furthermore, the giant viruses may indicate that there is no sharp border between living and non-living entities but an evolutionary continuum. Here, it is discussed how viruses can lose and gain genes, and that they are essential drivers of evolution. This discussion may stimulate the thinking about viruses as early possible forms of life. Apart from our view “viruses first”, there are others such as “proteins first” and “metabolism first.”
Text: Mycoplasma mycoides by systematic deletion of individual genes resulted in a synthetic minimal genome of 473 genes (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Can one consider simpler living entities?
There are elements with zero genes that fulfill many criteria for early life: ribozymes, catalytic RNAs closely related to viroids. They were recovered in vitro from 10 15 molecules (aptamers), 220 nucleotides in length, by 10 rounds of selection. Among the many RNA species present in this collection of quasispecies RNAs were catalytically active members, enzymatically active ribozymes. The sequence space for 220-mer RNAs is about 3 × 10 132 (Eigen, 1971; Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Brackett and Dieckmann, 2006) .
The selected ribozymes were able to replicate, cleave, join, and form peptide bonds. They can polymerize progeny chemically, allow for mutations to occur and can evolve. One molecule serves as catalyst, the other one as substrate. Replication of ribozymes was demonstrated in the test tube (Lincoln and Joyce, 2009) . Ribozymes can form peptide bonds between amino acids (Zhang and Cech, 1997) . Thus, small peptides were available by ribozyme activity. Consequently, an RNA modification has been proposed as peptide nucleic acid (PNA), with more stable peptide bonds instead of phosphodiester bonds (Zhang and Cech, 1997; Joyce, 2002) . Replication of RNA molecules can be performed chemically from RNA without polymerase enzymes. In addition, deoxyribozymes can form from ribonucleotides (Wilson and Szostak, 1999) . Thus, DNA can arise from RNA chemically, without the key protein enzyme, the reverse transcriptase.
An entire living world is possible from non-coding RNA (ncRNA) before evolution of the genetic code and protein enzymes. Ribozymes naturally consist of circular single-stranded RNAs (Orgel, 2004) . They lack the genetic triplet code and do not encode proteins. Instead, they exhibit structural information by hairpin-loops that form hydrogen bonds between incomplete double strands, and loops free to interact with other molecules. They represent a quasispecies in which many species of RNA may form, such as ribozymes, tRNA-like molecules, and other ncRNAs. RNAs within such a pool can bind amino acids. Ninety different amino acids have been identified on the Murchison meteorite found in Australia, while on Earth only about 20 of them are used for protein synthesis (Meierhenrich, 2008) . Where formation of ribozymes occurred on the early Earth is a matter of speculation. The hydrothermal vents such as black smokers in the deep ocean are possibilities where life may have started (Martin et al., 2008) . There, temperature gradients and clay containing minerals such as magnesium or manganese are available. Pores or niches offer possibilities for concentration of building blocks, which is required for chemical reactions to occur. Interestingly, also ice is a candidate for ribozyme formation and chemical reactions. Ice crystals displace the biomolecules into the liquid phase, which leads to concentration, creating a quasicellular compartmentalization where de novo synthesis of nucleotide precursors is promoted. There, RNA and ribozymes can emerge, which are capable of self-replication (Attwater et al., 2010) .
tRNA-amino acid complexes can find RNAs as "mRNAs." Such interactions could have contributed to the evolution of the genetic code. This sequence of events can lead to primitive ribosome precursors. Ribozymes are the essential catalytic elements in ribosomes: "The ribosome is a ribozyme" (Cech, 2000) , supplemented with about a hundred scaffold proteins later during evolution. The proteins have structural functions and contribute indirectly to enzymatic activity. Are these ribosomebound ribozymes fossils from the early Earth? Small peptides can be formed by ribozymes before ribosomes evolved, whereby single or dimeric amino acids may originate from the universe (Meierhenrich, 2008) .
Small peptides with basic amino acids can increase the catalytic activity of ribozymes as shown in vitro (Müller et al., 1994) . Such proteins are known as RNA-binding proteins from RNA viruses that protect the RNA genome, with motifs such as RAPRKKG of the nucleocapsid NCp7 of HIV (Schmalzbauer et al., 1996) . Peptides can enhance the catalytic activity of ribozymes up to a 100-fold (Müller et al., 1994) . Such peptides of RNA viruses serve as chaperones that remove higher ordered RNA structures, allowing for more efficient interaction of RNA molecules and increasing transcription rates of RNA polymerases (Müller et al., 1994) . Ribonucleoproteins may have also been functionally important during the evolution of ribosomes (Harish and Caetano-Anolles, 2012) .
These pre-ribosomal structures are also similar to precursorlike structures of retroviruses. Reverse transcription can be performed by ribozymes chemically. This action does not necessarily require a protein polymerase such as the reverse transcriptase. Similarly, deoxyribonucleotides can arise by removal of an oxygen without the need of a protein enzyme (a reductase) as today, and allow for DNA polymerization (Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Joyce, 2002) . The same elements of the precursors for ribosomes are also building blocks of retroviruses, which may have a similar evolutionary origin (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . tRNAs serve as primers for the reverse transcriptase, and the sequence of promoters of transposable elements are derived from tRNAs (Lander et al., 2001) . The ribozymes developed into more complex self-cleaving group II introns with insertion of genes encoding a reverse transcriptase and additional proteins (Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) (Figure 1) .
It came as a surprise that the genomes of almost all species are rich in ncDNA, transcribed into ncRNAs but not encoding proteins, as evidenced, for instance, by the "Encyclopedia of DNA Elements" (ENCODE) project. ncDNA amounts to more than 98% of the human DNA genome (Deveson et al., 2017) . Higher organisms tend to have more non-coding information, which allows for more complex modes of gene regulation. The ncRNAs are regulators of the protein-coding sequences. Highly complex organisms such as humans typically have a high number of ncRNA and regulatory mechanisms. ncRNA can range from close to zero in the smallest bacteria such as Pelagibacter ubique to about 98% in the human genome.
RNA viruses such as the retrovirus HIV harbor ncRNAs for gene regulation such as the trans-activating response element (TAR), the binding site for the Tat protein for early viral gene expression. Tat has a highly basic domain comprising mostly Lys and Arg residues, resembling other RNA binding proteins. ncRNA also serves on viral RNA genomes as ribosomal entry sites, primer binding sites or packaging signals. DNA synthesis depends on RNA synthesis as initial event, with RNA primers as starters for DNA replication, inside of cells as FIGURE 1 | A compartment is shown with essential components of life as discussed in the text. Non-coding RNA (ncRNA), ribozymes or viroids, can perform many steps for life without protein-coding genes but only by structural information. Individual amino acids are indicated as black dots and may be available on Earth from the universe. DNA may have existed before retroviruses. The compartment can be interpreted as pre-virus or pre-cell. Viroid, green; RNA, red; DNA, black.
well as during retroviral replication, proving a requirement of RNA (Flint, 2015) .
The number of mammalian protein-coding genes is about 20,000. Surprisingly, this is only a fifth of the number of genes of bread wheat (Appels et al., 2018) . Tulips, maize and other plants also have larger genomes, indicating that the number of genes does not necessarily reflect the complexity of an organism. What makes these plant genomes so large, is still an open question. Could the giant genomes possibly be the result to breeding of plants by farmers or gardeners?
According to Szostak there are molecules which appear like relics from the RNA world such as acetyl-CoA or vitamin B12, both of which are bound to a ribonucleotide for no obvious reason -was it "forgotten" to be removed? (Roberts and Szostak, 1997; Szostak et al., 2001; Szostak, 2011) . Perhaps the connected RNA serves as structural stabilizer. Lipid vesicles could have formed the first compartments and enclosed ribozymes, tRNAs with selected amino acids, and RNA which became mRNA. Is this a pre-cell or pre-virus (Figure 1) ? Patel et al. (2015) demonstrated that the building blocks of life, ribonucleotides, lipids and amino acids, can be formed from C, H, O, P, N, S in a "one pot" synthesis. This study can be regarded as a follow-up study of the classical Urey-Miller in vitro synthesis of biomolecules (Miller, 1953; Miller and Urey, 1959) . Transition from the RNA to the DNA world was promoted by the formation of the reverse transcriptase. The enzyme was first described in retroviruses but it is almost ubiquitous and found in numerous cellular species, many of which with unknown functions (Simon and Zimmerly, 2008; Lescot et al., 2016) . It is an important link between the RNA and the DNA worlds. The name reverse transcriptase is historical and irritating because it is the "real" transcriptase during the transition from the RNA to the DNA world. Similarly, the ribonuclease H (RNase H) is an essential enzyme of retroviruses (Mölling et al., 1971) . The RNase H turned out to be one of the five most frequent and ancient proteins (Ma et al., 2008 ) that belongs to a superfamily of more than sixty different unique representatives and 152 families with numerous functions (Majorek et al., 2014) .
Some of the many tRNAs can become loaded with amino acids. There are viruses containing tRNA-like structures (TLS), resembling these early RNAs (Dreher, 2009) . The TLS of these viruses typically bind to a single amino acid. TLS-viruses include plant viruses, such as Turnip yellow mosaic virus, in Peanut clump virus, Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), and Brome mosaic virus. Only half a tRNA is found in Narnaviruses of fungi. The amino acids known to be components of tRNA-like viruses are valine, histidine and tyrosine. The structures were also designated as "mimicry, " enhancing translation (Dreher, 2009 (Dreher, , 2010 . They look like "frozen" precursor-like elements for protein synthesis. This combination of a partial tRNA linked to one amino acid can be interpreted as an evolutionary early step toward protein synthesis, trapped in a viral element.
Ribozymes are related to the protein-free viroids. Viroids are virus-like elements that belong to the virosphere, the world of viruses (Chela-Flores, 1994) . Viroids lack protein coats and therefore were initially not designated as viruses but virus-like viroids when they were discovered in 1971 by Theodor Diener. He described viroids as "living fossils" (Diener, 2016) (Figure 2) .
From infected potatoes, Diener isolated the Potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd) whose genome was about a 100-fold smaller than those of viruses known at that time. The viroids known today are ranging from 246 to 467 nucleotides. They contain circular single-stranded RNA, are protein-free and self-replicating with no genetic information, but only structural FIGURE 2 | Viroids are hairpin-loop structures and are shown schematically and as electron micrograph. Viroids are, like ribozymes, without genetic information and play major biological roles today in plant diseases, in carnation flowers, in liver cancer, as catalyst of protein synthesis in ribosomes and as circular regulatory RNAs, as "sponges" for other regulatory RNAs.
information in the form of hairpin-loops (Riesner et al., 1979) . They can generate copies of themselves in the appropriate environment. They were designated as the "frontiers of life" (Flores et al., 2014) .
The knowledge of virus composition was based on TMV and its crystallization by Wendell Stanley in 1935 (Pennazio and Roggero, 2000) . The genome of TMV is protein-coding singlestranded RNA of about 6,400 nucleotides that is enclosed by a rod-like protein coat. Viroids, in contrast, do not encode proteins and lack coats but they are closely related to viruses. Viroids can lose their autonomy and rely on host RNA polymerases to replicate, are capable of infecting plants and many are economically important pathogens. There are two families, the nucleus-replicating Pospiviroidae such as PSTVd and the chloroplast-replicating Avsunviroidae like the Avocado sunblotch viroid (ASBVd). Their replication requires host enzymes. Thus, autonomy is replaced by dependence on host enzymes and an intracellular lifestyle.
Most viroids are often enzymatically active ribozymes -yet they are examples that this trait can get lost as a result of changing environmental conditions. Loss of ribozyme activity is a functional, not a genetic loss. Only the nuclear variants, the Pospiviroidae, can lose their ribozyme activity and use the cellular RNase III enzyme for their replication. In contrast, the Avsunviroidae are still active hammerhead ribozymes. Thus, inside the nucleus of a host cell, the enzymatic RNA function can become unnecessary. Not genes, but a function, the catalytic activity, gets lost.
Viroids did apparently not gain genes but cooperated for a more complex lifestyle. For example, Carnation small viroid-like RNA (CarSV RNA) cooperates with a retrovirus and is accompanied by a homologous DNA generated by a reverse transcriptase. This enzyme presumably originates from a pararetrovirus of plants. Pararetroviruses package virus particles at a different stage during replication than retroviruses, the DNA, not the RNA. This unique combination between two viral elements has so far only been detected with CarSV in carnation flowers (Flores et al., 2005 (Flores et al., , 2014 . Why did such a cooperation evolve -perhaps by breeding gardeners? RNA is sensitive to degradation; therefore, genetic increase and growth of the genome may not be favorable energetically -at least not in plants. Gain of function is, in this case, cooperation.
The circular RNA (circRNA) is related to ribozymes/viroids as a chief regulator of other regulatory RNAs, a "sponge" absorbing small RNAs. Micro RNAs (miRNAs) are post-transcriptional regulators that are affected by the presence of circRNAs. circRNAs were detected in human and mouse brains and testes as well as in plants. They can bind 70 conserved miRNAs in a cell and amount up to 25,000 molecules (Hansen et al., 2013) . Their structure is reminiscent of catalytically active ribozymes.
There is an exceptional viroid that gained coding information and entered the human liver (Taylor, 2009) . The viroid is known as hepatitis delta virus (HDV). It has the smallest genome of any known animal virus of about 1,680 nucleotides. It has properties typical of viroids, since it contains circRNA, forms similar hairpin-loops and replicates in the nucleus using host enzymes. Two polymerases have to redirect their specificity from DNA to RNA to generate the HDV genome and antigenome. Both of them have ribozyme activity. In contrast to other ribozymes, HDV encodes a protein, the hepatitis delta antigen (HDVAg) that occurs in two forms, the small-HDVAg (24 kDa) supporting replication and the large-HDVAg (27 kDa) that helps virion assembly. The gene was presumably picked up from the host cell by recombination of HDV's mRNA intermediate with a host mRNA. Transmission depends on a helper virus, the Hepatitis B virus (HBV), which delivers the coat (Taylor, 2009 ) Does packaging by a helper virus protect the genome and thereby allow for a larger viroid to exist?
In plants, viroids may not be able to become bigger possibly due to their sensitivity to degradation -but they cannot become much smaller either. Only a single viroid is known that is completely composed of protein-coding RNA with triplets (AbouHaidar et al., 2014). Viroids and related replicating RNAs are error-prone replicating units and the error frequency imposes a certain minimal size onto them, as they would otherwise become extinct. This mechanism has been described as "error catastrophe, " which prevents survival (Eigen, 1971 (Eigen, , 2013 . The viroids and related RNAs are the smallest known replicons. Smaller ones would become extinct in the absence of repair systems.
In summary, RNA can catalyze many reactions. Protein enzymes which may have evolved later have higher catalytic activities. Ribozymes are carriers of information, but do not require coding genes. Information is stored in their sequence and structure. Thus, replication of an initial RNA is followed by flow of information, from DNA to RNA to protein, as described the Central Dogma (Crick, 1968) . Even an information flow from protein to DNA has been described for some archaeal proteins (Béguin et al., 2015) . The DNA-protein world contains numerous ncRNAs with key functions. ncRNA may serve as a model compound for the origin of life on other planets. Hereby not the chemical composition of this molecule is of prime relevance, but its simplicity and multifunctionality. Furthermore, RNA is software and hardware in a single molecule, which makes it unique in our world. There are other scenarios besides the here discussed "virus-first, " such as "protein-first", "metabolism-fist" or the "lipid world" (Segré et al., 2001; Andras and Andras, 2005; Vasas et al., 2010; Moelling, 2012) . Some of these alternative concepts were built on phylogenomics, the reconstruction of the tree of life by genome sequencing (Delsuc et al., 2005) . Surprisingly, it was Sir Francis Crick, one of the discoverers of the DNA double-helix, who stated that he would not be surprised about a world completely built of RNA. A similar prediction was made by Walter Gilbert (Crick, 1968; Gilbert, 1986) . What a vision! Our world was almost 50 years later defined as "RNAprotein" world (Altman, 2013) . One can speculate our world was built of ribozymes or viroids, which means "viruses first."
ncRNAs appear as relics from the past RNA world, before DNA, the genetic code and proteins evolved. However, ncRNA is essential in our biological DNA world today. It is possible to produce such ncRNA today in the test tube by loss of genic information from protein-coding RNA. This reduction to ncRNA was demonstrated in vitro with phage RNA. Phage Qβ genomic RNA, 4,217 nucleotides in length, was incubated in the presence of Qβ replicase, free nucleotides and salts, a rich milieu in the test tube. The RNA was allowed to replicate by means of the Qβ replicase. Serial transfer of aliquots to fresh medium led to ever faster replication rates and reduction of genomic size, down to 218 nucleotides of ncRNA in 74 generations. This study demonstrated that, depending on environmental conditions, an extreme gene reduction can take place. This experiment performed in 1965 was designated as "Spiegelman's Monster." Coding RNA became replicating ncRNA (Spiegelman et al., 1965; Kacian et al., 1972) ! Manfred Eigen extended this experiment and demonstrated further that a mixture containing no RNA to start with but only ribonucleotides and the Qβ replicase can under the right conditions in a test tube spontaneously generate self-replicating ncRNA. This evolved into a form similar to Spiegelman's Monster. The presence of the replicase enzyme was still necessary in these studies. Furthermore, a change in enzyme concentration and addition of short RNAs or an RNA intercalator influenced the arising RNA population (Sumper and Luce, 1975; Eigen, 2013) . Thus, the complexity of genomes depends on the environment: poor conditions lead to increased complexity and rich environments to reduced complexity.
The process demonstrated in this experiment with viral components indicates that reversion to simplicity, reduction in size, loss of genetic information and speed in replication can be major forces of life, even though this appears to be like a reversion of evolution. The experiment can perhaps be generalized from the test tube to a principle, that the most successful survivors on our planet are the viruses and microorganisms, which became the most abundant entities. Perhaps life can start from there again.
These studies raise the question of how RNA molecules can become longer, if the small polymers become smaller and smaller, replicate faster and outcompete longer ones. This may be overcome by heat flow across an open pore in submerged rocks, which concentrates replicating oligonucleotides from a constant feeding flow and selection for longer strands. This has been described for an increase from 100 to 1,000 nucleotides in vitro. RNA molecules shorter than 75 nucleotides will die out (Kreysing et al., 2015) . Could a poor environment lead to an increase of complexity? This could be tested. Ribozymes were shown to grow in size by uptake of genes, as demonstrated for HDV (Taylor, 2009 ).
An interesting recent unexpected example supporting the notion that environmental conditions influence genetic complexity, is the human gut microbiome. Its complexity increases with diverse food, while uniform rich food reduces its diversity and may lead to diseases such as obesity. Colonization of the human intestinal tract starts at birth. A few dozen bacterial and viral/phage species are conserved between individuals (core sequences) as a stable composition (Broecker et al., 2016c . Dysbiosis has been observed in several chronic diseases and in obesity, a loss of bacterial richness and diversity. Nutrition under affluent conditions with sugar-rich food contributes to obesity, which results in a significant reduction of the complexity of the microbiome. This reduction is difficult to revert (Cotillard et al., 2013; Le Chatelier et al., 2013) . The gut microbiome in human patients with obesity is reminiscent of the gene reduction described in the Spiegelman's Monster experiment: reduction of genes in a rich environment.
The reduction of the complexity of the microbiome is in part attributed to the action of phages, which under such conditions, defined as stress, lyse the bacteria. Fecal microbiota transplantation can even be replaced by soluble fractions containing phages or metabolites from the donor without bacteria (Ott et al., 2017) . Analogously, the most highly complex microbiomes are found in indigenous human tribes in Africa, which live on a broad variety of different nutrients. It is a slow process, though, to increase gut microbiota complexity by diverse nutrition. The obesity-associated microbiota that survive are fitter and more difficult to counteract. Urbanization and westernization of the diet is associated with a loss of microbial biodiversity, loss of microbial organisms and genes (Segata, 2015) .
To understand the mechanism and driving force for genome reduction, deletion rates were tested by insertion of an indicator gene into the Salmonella enterica genome. The loss of the indicator gene was monitored by serial passage in rich medium. After 1,000 generations about 25% of the deletions caused increased bacterial fitness. Deletions resulted in smaller genomes with reduced or absence of DNA repair genes (Koskiniemi et al., 2012) . Gene loss conferred a higher fitness to the bacteria under these experimental conditions.
The recently discovered mimiviruses and other giant viruses are worth considering for understanding the evolution of life with respect to the contribution of viruses. Their hosts are, for example, Acanthamoeba, Chlorella, and Coccolithus algae (Emiliania huxleyi), but also corals or sponges as discussed more recently. Mimiviruses were first discovered in cooling water towers in Bradford, United Kingdom in 2003 with about 1,000 genes, most of which unrelated to previously known genes. Mimiviruses have received attention because they contain elements that were considered hallmarks of living cells, not of viruses, such as elements required for protein synthesis, tRNAs and amino acid transferases. The mimiviruses harbor these building blocks as incomplete sets not sufficient for independent protein synthesis as bacteria or archaea can perform, preventing them from leading an autonomous life (La Scola et al., 2003 Scola et al., , 2008 . They are larger than some bacteria. Giant viruses can be looked at as being on an evolutionary path toward a cellular organism. Alternatively, they may have evolved from a cellular organism by loss of genetic information (Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015) . Giant viruses have frequently taken up genes from their hosts by horizontal gene transfer (HGT) (La Scola et al., 2008; Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015; Colson et al., 2018) . A graph on genome sizes shows that mimiviruses and bacteria overlap in size, indicating a continuous transition between viruses and bacteria and between living and non-living worlds (based on Holmes, 2011) (Figure 3) . Other giant viruses, such as megaviruses, were discovered in the ocean of Chile with 1,120 genes. Most recently the Klosneuvirus was identified in the sewage of the monastery Klosterneuburg in Austria in 2017 with 1.57 million (mio) basepairs (Mitch, 2017) . Pithovirus sibericum is the largest among giant viruses discovered to date with a diameter of 1.5 microns, a genome of 470,000 bp with 467 putative genes, 1.6 microns in length, and it is presumably 30,000 years old as it was recovered from permafrost in Siberia (Legendre et al., 2014) . The smaller Pandoraviruses with 1 micron in length have five times larger genomes, 2,500,000 bp (Philippe et al., 2013) (Figure 3) .
The giant viruses can even be hosts to smaller viruses, the virophages, reminiscent of bacteriophages, the viruses of bacteria. These virophages such as Sputnik are only 50 nm in size with 18,343 bp of circular dsDNA and 21 predicted proteincoding genes. They replicate in viral factories and consume the resources of the mimivirus, thereby destroying it. Some, virophages can even integrate into the genome of the cellular host and can be reactivated when the host is infected by giant viruses. Thus, giant viruses suggest that viruses are close to living entities or may have been alive (La Scola et al., 2008; Fischer and Hackl, 2016) . In biology it is common to distinguish between living and dead matter by the ability to synthesize proteins and replicate autonomously. The giant viruses may be considered as missing link between the two, because they harbor "almost" the protein synthesis apparatus. The transition from living to the non-living world is continuous, not separated by a sharp borderline (Figure 3) .
Viruses are not considered alive by most of the scientific community and as written in textbooks, because they cannot replicate autonomously. Yet some of the giant viruses are equipped with almost all components of the protein synthesis machinery close to bacteria suggesting that they belong to the living matter (Schulz et al., 2017) . The ribozymes may have been the earliest replicating entity. Perhaps also other viruses were initially more independent of the early Earth than they are today. As described in Figure 1 there may have been initially no major difference between an early virus or an early cell. Only later viruses may have given up their autonomous replication and became parasites -as has been described for some bacteria (see below).
Efforts have been made to identify the smallest living cell that is still autonomously replicating. Among the presumably smallest naturally occurring bacteria is Pelagibacter ubique of the SAR11 clade of bacteria (Giovannoni, 2017) , which was discovered in 1990. It is an alpha-proteobacterium with 1,389 genes present ubiquitously in all oceans. It can reach up to 10 28 free living cells in total and represents about 25% of microbial plankton cells. Very little of its DNA is non-coding. It harbors podophage-type phages, designated as "pelagiphage" (Zhao et al., 2013) . This small bacterium was designated as the most common organism on the planet. Why is it so successful? This autonomous bacterium is smaller than some parasitic giant viruses. Craig Venter, who first succeeded in sequencing the human genome, tried to minimize the putative smallest genome of a living species, from Mycoplasma mycoides, a parasitic bacterium that lives in ruminants (Gibson et al., 2008 (Gibson et al., , 2010 . His group synthesized a genome of 531,000 bp with 473 genes, 149 of them (32%) with unknown functions (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Among the smallest parasitic living organisms is Nanoarchaeum equitans. It is a thermophile archaeon which lives at 80 • C and at pH 6 with 2% salt (Huber et al., 2003) . Its genome has a size of 490,000 bp and encodes 540 genes. N. equitans is an obligate symbiont of a bigger archaeon, Ignicoccus riding on it as on a horse, hence the name (Huber et al., 2003) .
The world of viruses covers a range of three logs in size of their genomes: from zero genes to about 2,500 genes amounting to about 2,500,000 bp of DNA. The zero-gene viroids are about 300 bases in length (Figure 3) .
The virosphere is the most successful reservoir of biological entities on our planet in terms of numbers of particles, speed of replication, growth rates, and sequence space. There are about 10 33 viruses on our planet and they are present in every single existing species (Suttle, 2005) .
There is no living species without viruses! Viruses also occur freely in the oceans, in the soil, in clouds up to the stratosphere and higher, to at least 300 km in altitude. They populate the human intestine, birth canal, and the outside of the body as protective layer against microbial populations. Microbes contain phages that are activated during stress conditions such as lack of nutrients, change in temperatures, lack of space and other changes of environmental conditions.
One of the most earth-shaking papers of this century was the publication of the human genome sequence (Lander et al., 2001) . About half, possibly even two-thirds of the sequence are composed of more or less complete endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) and related retroelements (REs) (de Koning et al., 2011) . REs amplify via copy-and-paste mechanisms involving a reverse transcriptase step from an RNA intermediate into DNA. In addition, DNA transposable elements (TEs) move by a cutand-paste mechanism. The origin of REs is being discussed as remnants of ancient retroviral germline infections that became evolutionarily fixed in the genome. About 450,000 human ERV (HERV) elements constitute about 8% of the human genome consisting of hallmark retroviral elements like the gag, pol, env genes and flanking long terminal repeats (LTR) that act as promoters (Lander et al., 2001) . Howard Temin, one of the discoverers of the reverse transcriptase, in 1985 already described endogenous retrovirus-like elements, which he estimated to about 10% of the human and mouse genome sequence (Temin, 1985) . The actual number is about 45% as estimated today (Lander et al., 2001) . In some genes such as the Protein Kinase Inhibitor B (PKIB) gene we determined about 70% retrovirusrelated sequences (Moelling and Broecker, 2015) . Is there a limit? Could it have been 100%? Retroviruses are estimated to have entered the lineage of the mammalian genome 550 million years ago (MYA) (Hayward, 2017) . Older ERV sequences may exist but are unrecognizable today due to the accumulation of mutations.
ERVs undergo mutations, deletions or homologous recombination events with large deletions and can become as short as solo LTR elements, which are a few hundred bp in length -the left-overs from full-length retroviral genomes of about 10,000 bp. The LTR promoters can deregulate neighboring genes. Homologous recombination events may be considered as gene loss or gene reduction events. It is the assumption that the ERVs, which were no longer needed for host cell defense, were no longer selected for by evolution and consequently deleted as unnecessary consumers of energy.
Eugene Koonin points out that infection and integration are unique events occurring at a fast pace, while loss and gene reduction may take much longer time frames (Wolf and Koonin, 2013) .
A frequent gene reduction of eukaryotic genomes is the loss of the viral envelope protein encoded by the env gene. Without a coat, retroviruses can no longer leave the cell and infect other cells. They lose mobility and become obligatory intracellular elements. Helper viruses can supply envelope proteins in trans and mobilize the viruses. TEs or REs can be regarded as examples of coat-free intracellular virus relics -or could it have been the other way round, perhaps precursors of full-length retroviruses?
These elements can be amplified intracellularly and modify the host genomes by integration with the potential danger of gene disruption and genetic changes. REs can lead to gene duplications and pseudogene development, with one copy for stable conservation of acquired functions and the other one for innovations (Cotton and Page, 2005) . Such duplications constitute large amounts of mammalian genomes (Zhang, 2003) . Retroviruses have an RNase H moiety duplication, one of which serves as a catalytically inactive linker between the RT polymerase and the enzymatically active RNase H (Xiong and Eickbush, 1990; Malik and Eickbush, 2001; Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) . This gene duplication dates back to 500 mio years (Cotton and Page, 2005) .
Gene duplications are a common cause of cancer, which often occurs only in the genome of the cancer cell itself, less affecting offsprings. Myc, Myb, ErbB2, Ras, and Raf are oncogenes amplified in diverse types of human cancers (Vogelstein and Kinzler, 2002) . The ability of retroviruses to integrate makes them distinct from endosymbionts which stay separate. Yet the net result is very similar, acquisition of new genetic information, which is transmitted to the next generation, if the germline is infected and endogenization of the virus occurred.
Viral integration is not limited to eukaryotic cells but also a mechanism in prokaryotes for maintenance of the lysogenic state of phages inside bacteria.
Also, for other eukaryotic viruses such as HBV, the envelope surface antigen BHsAg can be deleted, which leads to an obligatory intracellular life style for the virus, which especially in the presence of HCV promotes cancer (Yang et al., 2016) .
HIV has been shown to rapidly lose one of its auxiliary genes, nef, originally for negative factor. The gene was lost within a rather low number of passages of the virus grown under tissue culture conditions by selection for high virus titer producing cells. Deletion of nef resulted in a significant increase of the virus titer in culture -hence the name. The nef gene product was of no need inside tissue culture cells, rather it was inhibitory for replication. However, it is essential for pathogenicity in animals, and subsequently nef was reinterpreted as "necessary factor" (Flint, 2015) .
Also, the human hosts of HIV can lose a significant terminal portion of a seven transmembrane receptor in lymphocytes, the primary target cell for HIV entry and for virus uptake. This molecule, the CCR5 cytokine receptor is truncated by 32 carboxy-terminal amino acids (CCR5-32), disabling the receptor functionally. The allele frequency of the mutant CCR5-32 mutant is about 10% in the European population, making these people resistant to HIV infections (Solloch et al., 2017) . This gene loss in Europeans has been shown to make the individuals resistant not only against HIV infection but also against malaria. This may have been the selective pressure in the past before HIV/AIDS arose. No side effect for humans lacking this gene has been described (Galvani and Slatkin, 2003) .
Viruses have been proven to be drivers of evolution (Villarreal and Witzany, 2010) , including the human genome, which by at least 45% is composed of sequences related to retroviruses. In addition, endogenized retroviruses supplied the syncytin genes that are essential for the development of the mammalian placenta, and allowed the growth of embryos without its rejection by the maternal immune system (Dupressoir et al., 2012) . Thus, the same property which causes immunodeficiency in HIV-infected patients and leads to AIDS causes syncytia formation, cell fusion after infection by a retrovirus. Viruses have also been proposed to be at the origin of the evolution of adaptive immunity (Villarreal, 2009 ). Thus, viruses shaped genomes by supplying essential genes and mechanisms.
Endogenization of retroviruses has occurred in the mammalian genomes for at least 550 mio years (Hayward, 2017) . If the integrated ERVs did not provide any selective advantage, they deteriorated and accumulated mutations with loss of function. This was directly proven by reconstruction of an infectious retrovirus from the consensus sequence of 9 defective endogenous virus sequences, designated as Phoenix. The virus was expressed from a constructed synthetic DNA clone in cell culture and formed virus particles identified by high resolution microscopic analysis (Dewannieux and Heidmann, 2013) .
The koalas in Australia are currently undergoing endogenization of a retrovirus (koala retrovirus, KoRV) in "real time" and demonstrate possible consequences for immunity. In the early 1900s, some individuals were transferred to islands, including Kangaroo Island, close to the Australian mainland for repopulation purposes, as koalas were threatened to become extinct. Today, the majority of the koala population is infected by KoRV, which is closely related to the Gibbon ape leukemia virus (GALV). Yet, koalas isolated on Kangaroo Island are KoRV negative, which allows dating the introduction of KoRV into the koala population to about one hundred years ago. Many of the infected koalas fell ill and died, yet some populations became resistant within about 100 years, corresponding to about 10 generations. The koalas likely developed resistance due to the integrated DNA proviruses. The retrovirus is transmitted as exogenous as well as endogenous virus, similar to the Jaagsiekte sheep retrovirus (JSRV), whereby the endogenized viruses protect with a viral gene product, such as Env, against de novo infections by "superinfection exclusion" (Tarlinton, 2012) . The contribution of retroviruses to the antiviral defense is striking, since all retroviral genes have analogous genes in the siRNA/RNAi defense mechanism of eukaryotic cells (Moelling et al., 2006) .
Retroviruses can protect against infection by other related viruses, for example, by expressing Env proteins that block cellsurface receptors (Villarreal, 2011) . A comparable mechanism protects bacterial cells against DNA phages, by integrated phage DNA fragments that are transcribed into mRNA and hybridize to incoming new DNA phages and thereby lead to their destruction by hybrid-specific nucleases, CRISPR/Cas immunity (Charpentier and Doudna, 2013) . It is often not realized that immunity acquisition in bacteria and mammalian cells follow analogous mechanisms (Figure 4) .
Integration of retroviruses normally occurs in somatic cells after infection as an obligatory step during the viral life cycle. Infection of germline cells can lead to transmission to the next generation and ultimately result in inherited resistance. Endogenized retroviruses likely caused resistance FIGURE 4 | Viruses protect against viruses: retroviruses protect a cell against a new infection by a similar virus designated as "superinfection exclusion" or viral interference. This is mediated by viral gene products such as proteins or nucleic acids. Similarly, phages protect against phages: superinfection of bacteria is prevented by CRISPR/Cas RNA originating from previous infections. The mechanisms of defense against viruses and phages are analogous. Protection by viruses or phages against superinfections represents cellular defense and acquired immunity. The four examples are discussed in the text.
to the exogenous counterparts. Similarly, resistance to Simian Immune Deficiency virus (SIV) in some monkey species may be explained by endogenization (Li et al., 2017 (Li et al., , 2018 . In the case of phages and their prokaryotic hosts the mechanism is described as CRISPR/Cas, which follow analogous principles of "endogenization" of incoming genetic material for subsequent exclusion.
One may speculate that HIV may also eventually become endogenized into the human genome. There is some evidence that HIV can infect human germline cells and can be transmitted to the embryonic genome (Wang et al., 2011) . How long this may take is not known -10 generations?
The loss of function of ERVs can occur by mutations, deletions of the env or other genes and ultimately all coding genes by homologous recombination, leaving behind only one LTR. The number of retrovirus-like elements add up to about 450,000, corresponding to 8% of the human genome (Lander et al., 2001; Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). The promoter regions were analyzed for their contribution to cancer by activating neighboring genes -as a consequence of a former retrovirus infection. Indeed, activated cellular genes by "downstream promotion" were identified in animal studies with activation of the myc gene as one of many examples, leading to chronic, not acute development of cancer (Ott et al., 2013) . As a general mechanism for human cancer today the LTRs are, however, not identified as a major culprit. Most of the ERVs we find today have been integrated during evolution in introns or other regions where their presence is relatively harmless. Did the other ones result in death of the carriers which disappeared? The effects of LTRs on the expression levels of neighboring host genes was studied with the endogenous human virus, HERV-K, as a possible cause of cancer, but this appears not to be a general phenomenon (Broecker et al., 2016b) . As shown for the koalas, ERVs can confer immunity to viral infections (Feschotte and Gilbert, 2012) .
A related ERV, HERV-H, was shown to produce an RNA that keeps early embryonic cells pluripotent and even revert adult cells to regain pluripotency (Grow et al., 2015) . Thus, the role of ERVs may be more complex than we presently know.
Transposable elements and REs that lost the ability of cellular transmission by deletion of the coat protein majorly contribute to genetic complexity of host cells. They are "locked" inside the cells and are major drivers of the increase of genetic complexity (Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). One could speculate that these intracellular elements are replicationincompetent retroviruses lacking coats (Lander et al., 2001) . Bats transmit viruses such as Ebola and SARS coronavirus without suffering from disease (Beltz, 2018) . Even RNA viruses such as Bornaviruses have been shown to integrate by illegitimate reverse transcription, possibly also supplying immunity against superinfection (Katzourakis and Gifford, 2010) .
There are two prominent events that significantly contributed to the success of life and the formation of cells. Both of them are associated with gene reduction. This phenomenon may play a role for the evolution of viruses from autonomous to parasitic lifestyles. In the 1960s Lynn Margulis proposed an extracellular origin for mitochondria (Margulis, 1970 (Margulis, , 1993 ). An ancestral cell, perhaps an archaeon, was infected by an anaerobic bacterium, which gave rise to mitochondria. Similarly, cyanobacteria formed the chloroplasts in modern plant cells. Mitochondria arose around 1.45 billion years ago (BYA) (Embley and Martin, 2006) . Mitochondria and chloroplasts are the most striking examples for a change in lifestyle from autonomous bacteria to endosymbionts. This transition is often considered as extremely rare and a hallmark of evolution of life on our planet. However, there are many other obligate intracellular parasites such as Rickettsia, Chlamydia trachomatis, Coxiella burnetii (the causative agent of Q fever), Mycobacterium leprae, M. tuberculosis, and M. mycoides (Beare et al., 2006) .
The change of lifestyle of the endosymbionts in the two cases of mitochondria and chloroplasts is striking. Both of them drastically reduced their genetic make-up. Mitochondria contain less than 37 genes, left from the original about 3,000 genes. Is endogenization of retroviruses, the ERVs, which are integrated into germline cells, related to endosymbiosis? Are these endosymbionts models for the transition from autonomous lifestyle to a parasitic life-which may have taken place with viruses? A more recent typical example for a reductive evolution are Rickettsia. These bacteria were assumed for some time to be viruses because of their obligatory intracellular parasitic existence. Rickettsia have evolved from autonomously replicating bacteria. Reductive evolution of endosymbionts can yield bacteria with tiny genomes on the expense of autonomous extracellular life. Their genomes are 1.11 mio bp in length with about 834 protein-coding genes, and loss of 24% by reductive evolution (Ogata et al., 2001) . Rickettsia may have some relationship with cyanobacteria, which are considered as the major symbionts.
Can one speculate that viruses may have been autonomous entities initially? Viroids may have undergone transition from autonomy to parasites, just as shown for mitochondria, chloroplasts or Rickettsia? To which extent have viruses been autonomous and independent of cellular metabolisms originally -and contributed to the origin of cells? Could they only later have lost their autonomy and become parasitic?
Viruses are minimalistic in their composition and must have undergone stringent gene reductions (Flint, 2015) . How small can their genomes become? Most coding RNA viruses still contain regulatory elements, ncRNA at the 3 and 5 terminal regions for ribosomal entry, protein synthesis, transcriptional regulation, and others.
A subgroup of retroviruses is an interesting example in respect to simultaneous loss and gain of genetic information. The oncogenic retroviruses or tumorviruses can recombine with cellular genes which under the promoters of retroviruses can become oncogenes and drivers of cancer. About a hundred oncogenes have been selected for in the laboratories and studied over decades for understanding the molecular mechanisms of cancer. Selection for growth advantages of the host cells led to the discovery of the fastest growth-promoting oncogenes we know today, such as Ras, Raf, ErbB or Myc, which are in part successful targets for anticancer drugs (Moelling et al., 1984) .
These oncogenes were in most cases taken up by the retroviruses at the expense of structural (gag), replicating (pol) or envelope (env) genes, and are often expressed as fusion proteins with Gag. Thus, oncogenic retroviruses are obligatory intracellular defective viruses and were selected for in the laboratory by researchers for the oncogenes with the most potent growth promoting ability. They need the supply of replicatory genes in trans from co-infecting helper viruses to infect other cells (Flint, 2015) . Retroviruses are able to pick up cellular genes, transfer and integrate them into neighboring cells. Some strains of Rous sarcoma virus maintain replication competent when carrying the cell-derived src (for sarcoma) oncogene encoding a protein of 536 amino acids that apparently can fit into the retroviral particle along with the full-size viral genome (Broecker et al., 2016a) . Spatial reasons may have influenced the formation of oncogenic retroviruses and limited their size and thereby led to their defective phenotypes.
There are indications that the uncontrolled activity of (retro)transposons in germline cells can result in diseases such as male infertility -presumably by "error catastrophe, " caused by too many transposition events. In mammals, piRNAs tame transposon activity by means of the RNase H activity of PIWI proteins during spermatogenesis (Girard et al., 2006) .
Only a minority of viruses are pathogens; most of them do not cause diseases. On the contrary, they are most important as drivers of evolution, as transmitters of genetic material, as innovative agents. In particular, the RNA viruses are the most innovative ones. Some of them are pathogenic and dangerous, such as HIV or influenza virus, or viroids in plants. RNA viruses are able to change so rapidly that the host immune system is unable to counteract the infection. Pathogenicity arises when environmental conditions change, for instance, when a virus enters a new organism or species.
Increase of cellular complexity by viruses is an important feature of evolution. Such major evolutionary changes are recently taken as arguments against the evolutionary theory by Charles Darwin who considered gradual changes, small increments by mutations as the main basis for selection and evolution. New criticism is addressing this thinking, considering larger changes as evolutionary drivers. Such changes arise by many complex phenomena such as endosymbiosis, infection by prokaryotes, viruses and fungi, recombination of genes, HGT, infections, sex. Dramatic changes such as endosymbiosis or pathogen infections extend Darwin's concept of evolution.
There are numerous examples for the contribution of viruses to the evolution of life since at least as long as 550 MYA (Hayward, 2017) . But genetic noise through random mutations does not allow us to go back to the origin of life. It may not be impossible that the earliest compartment was indistinguishable, either a pre-cell or a pre-virus. By analogy one may speculate that at some point autonomous viruses gave up independence for an obligatory intracellular life -as has been described for mitochondria and chloroplasts but also intracellular bacteria such as Rickettsia. This speculation is based on the concept that early life must have started simple and with high genetic variability and then became more complex. But complexity can be given up for a less energy consuming lifestyle with small genomes and high speed of replication (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . Therefore, the question may be repeated: "Are viruses our oldest ancestors?" Some fossil life can be partially reproduced in vitro by Spiegelman's Monster and Eigen's follow-up experiments, explaining the great surviving potential of simple ncRNA.
Viruses can be pathogens, but their recognition as primarily causing diseases is wrong. This notion is based on the history of viruses in medicine, as explained in a book entitled "Viruses: More Friends Than Foes" (Moelling, 2017) . The scenario described here focuses on viruses as drivers of evolution.
The early RNA world gained interest 20-30 years ago as evidenced by the references provided above. Surprisingly, there are scientists who still believe in the "pansperm hypothesis" and think that retroviruses are of extraterrestric origin (Steele et al., 2018) . The recent interest in the origin of life arose from the newly discovered exoplanets whose number increases daily -and which may be as numerous as 10 25 . Thus, pure statistics make some people believe that there is extraterrestrial life.
The extraterrestric life is mimicked in laboratories on Earth with many assumptions -perhaps this overview stimulates some thinking. The discussion presented here should be taken as concept about simple replicating and evolving entities possibly arising from different building blocks in other environments, with structure being more relevant than sequence. | Which group of RNA quasispecies satisfy criteria for life? | 1,180 | catalytically active members, enzymatically active ribozymes. The sequence space for 220-mer RNAs is about 3 × 10 132 ( | 2,682 |
1,690 | Viruses and Evolution – Viruses First? A Personal Perspective
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433886/
SHA: f3b9fc0f8e0a431366196d3e835e1ec368b379d1
Authors: Moelling, Karin; Broecker, Felix
Date: 2019-03-19
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00523
License: cc-by
Abstract: The discovery of exoplanets within putative habitable zones revolutionized astrobiology in recent years. It stimulated interest in the question about the origin of life and its evolution. Here, we discuss what the roles of viruses might have been at the beginning of life and during evolution. Viruses are the most abundant biological entities on Earth. They are present everywhere, in our surrounding, the oceans, the soil and in every living being. Retroviruses contributed to about half of our genomic sequences and to the evolution of the mammalian placenta. Contemporary viruses reflect evolution ranging from the RNA world to the DNA-protein world. How far back can we trace their contribution? Earliest replicating and evolving entities are the ribozymes or viroids fulfilling several criteria of life. RNA can perform many aspects of life and influences our gene expression until today. The simplest structures with non-protein-coding information may represent models of life built on structural, not genetic information. Viruses today are obligatory parasites depending on host cells. Examples of how an independent lifestyle might have been lost include mitochondria, chloroplasts, Rickettsia and others, which used to be autonomous bacteria and became intracellular parasites or endosymbionts, thereby losing most of their genes. Even in vitro the loss of genes can be recapitulated all the way from coding to non-coding RNA. Furthermore, the giant viruses may indicate that there is no sharp border between living and non-living entities but an evolutionary continuum. Here, it is discussed how viruses can lose and gain genes, and that they are essential drivers of evolution. This discussion may stimulate the thinking about viruses as early possible forms of life. Apart from our view “viruses first”, there are others such as “proteins first” and “metabolism first.”
Text: Mycoplasma mycoides by systematic deletion of individual genes resulted in a synthetic minimal genome of 473 genes (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Can one consider simpler living entities?
There are elements with zero genes that fulfill many criteria for early life: ribozymes, catalytic RNAs closely related to viroids. They were recovered in vitro from 10 15 molecules (aptamers), 220 nucleotides in length, by 10 rounds of selection. Among the many RNA species present in this collection of quasispecies RNAs were catalytically active members, enzymatically active ribozymes. The sequence space for 220-mer RNAs is about 3 × 10 132 (Eigen, 1971; Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Brackett and Dieckmann, 2006) .
The selected ribozymes were able to replicate, cleave, join, and form peptide bonds. They can polymerize progeny chemically, allow for mutations to occur and can evolve. One molecule serves as catalyst, the other one as substrate. Replication of ribozymes was demonstrated in the test tube (Lincoln and Joyce, 2009) . Ribozymes can form peptide bonds between amino acids (Zhang and Cech, 1997) . Thus, small peptides were available by ribozyme activity. Consequently, an RNA modification has been proposed as peptide nucleic acid (PNA), with more stable peptide bonds instead of phosphodiester bonds (Zhang and Cech, 1997; Joyce, 2002) . Replication of RNA molecules can be performed chemically from RNA without polymerase enzymes. In addition, deoxyribozymes can form from ribonucleotides (Wilson and Szostak, 1999) . Thus, DNA can arise from RNA chemically, without the key protein enzyme, the reverse transcriptase.
An entire living world is possible from non-coding RNA (ncRNA) before evolution of the genetic code and protein enzymes. Ribozymes naturally consist of circular single-stranded RNAs (Orgel, 2004) . They lack the genetic triplet code and do not encode proteins. Instead, they exhibit structural information by hairpin-loops that form hydrogen bonds between incomplete double strands, and loops free to interact with other molecules. They represent a quasispecies in which many species of RNA may form, such as ribozymes, tRNA-like molecules, and other ncRNAs. RNAs within such a pool can bind amino acids. Ninety different amino acids have been identified on the Murchison meteorite found in Australia, while on Earth only about 20 of them are used for protein synthesis (Meierhenrich, 2008) . Where formation of ribozymes occurred on the early Earth is a matter of speculation. The hydrothermal vents such as black smokers in the deep ocean are possibilities where life may have started (Martin et al., 2008) . There, temperature gradients and clay containing minerals such as magnesium or manganese are available. Pores or niches offer possibilities for concentration of building blocks, which is required for chemical reactions to occur. Interestingly, also ice is a candidate for ribozyme formation and chemical reactions. Ice crystals displace the biomolecules into the liquid phase, which leads to concentration, creating a quasicellular compartmentalization where de novo synthesis of nucleotide precursors is promoted. There, RNA and ribozymes can emerge, which are capable of self-replication (Attwater et al., 2010) .
tRNA-amino acid complexes can find RNAs as "mRNAs." Such interactions could have contributed to the evolution of the genetic code. This sequence of events can lead to primitive ribosome precursors. Ribozymes are the essential catalytic elements in ribosomes: "The ribosome is a ribozyme" (Cech, 2000) , supplemented with about a hundred scaffold proteins later during evolution. The proteins have structural functions and contribute indirectly to enzymatic activity. Are these ribosomebound ribozymes fossils from the early Earth? Small peptides can be formed by ribozymes before ribosomes evolved, whereby single or dimeric amino acids may originate from the universe (Meierhenrich, 2008) .
Small peptides with basic amino acids can increase the catalytic activity of ribozymes as shown in vitro (Müller et al., 1994) . Such proteins are known as RNA-binding proteins from RNA viruses that protect the RNA genome, with motifs such as RAPRKKG of the nucleocapsid NCp7 of HIV (Schmalzbauer et al., 1996) . Peptides can enhance the catalytic activity of ribozymes up to a 100-fold (Müller et al., 1994) . Such peptides of RNA viruses serve as chaperones that remove higher ordered RNA structures, allowing for more efficient interaction of RNA molecules and increasing transcription rates of RNA polymerases (Müller et al., 1994) . Ribonucleoproteins may have also been functionally important during the evolution of ribosomes (Harish and Caetano-Anolles, 2012) .
These pre-ribosomal structures are also similar to precursorlike structures of retroviruses. Reverse transcription can be performed by ribozymes chemically. This action does not necessarily require a protein polymerase such as the reverse transcriptase. Similarly, deoxyribonucleotides can arise by removal of an oxygen without the need of a protein enzyme (a reductase) as today, and allow for DNA polymerization (Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Joyce, 2002) . The same elements of the precursors for ribosomes are also building blocks of retroviruses, which may have a similar evolutionary origin (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . tRNAs serve as primers for the reverse transcriptase, and the sequence of promoters of transposable elements are derived from tRNAs (Lander et al., 2001) . The ribozymes developed into more complex self-cleaving group II introns with insertion of genes encoding a reverse transcriptase and additional proteins (Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) (Figure 1) .
It came as a surprise that the genomes of almost all species are rich in ncDNA, transcribed into ncRNAs but not encoding proteins, as evidenced, for instance, by the "Encyclopedia of DNA Elements" (ENCODE) project. ncDNA amounts to more than 98% of the human DNA genome (Deveson et al., 2017) . Higher organisms tend to have more non-coding information, which allows for more complex modes of gene regulation. The ncRNAs are regulators of the protein-coding sequences. Highly complex organisms such as humans typically have a high number of ncRNA and regulatory mechanisms. ncRNA can range from close to zero in the smallest bacteria such as Pelagibacter ubique to about 98% in the human genome.
RNA viruses such as the retrovirus HIV harbor ncRNAs for gene regulation such as the trans-activating response element (TAR), the binding site for the Tat protein for early viral gene expression. Tat has a highly basic domain comprising mostly Lys and Arg residues, resembling other RNA binding proteins. ncRNA also serves on viral RNA genomes as ribosomal entry sites, primer binding sites or packaging signals. DNA synthesis depends on RNA synthesis as initial event, with RNA primers as starters for DNA replication, inside of cells as FIGURE 1 | A compartment is shown with essential components of life as discussed in the text. Non-coding RNA (ncRNA), ribozymes or viroids, can perform many steps for life without protein-coding genes but only by structural information. Individual amino acids are indicated as black dots and may be available on Earth from the universe. DNA may have existed before retroviruses. The compartment can be interpreted as pre-virus or pre-cell. Viroid, green; RNA, red; DNA, black.
well as during retroviral replication, proving a requirement of RNA (Flint, 2015) .
The number of mammalian protein-coding genes is about 20,000. Surprisingly, this is only a fifth of the number of genes of bread wheat (Appels et al., 2018) . Tulips, maize and other plants also have larger genomes, indicating that the number of genes does not necessarily reflect the complexity of an organism. What makes these plant genomes so large, is still an open question. Could the giant genomes possibly be the result to breeding of plants by farmers or gardeners?
According to Szostak there are molecules which appear like relics from the RNA world such as acetyl-CoA or vitamin B12, both of which are bound to a ribonucleotide for no obvious reason -was it "forgotten" to be removed? (Roberts and Szostak, 1997; Szostak et al., 2001; Szostak, 2011) . Perhaps the connected RNA serves as structural stabilizer. Lipid vesicles could have formed the first compartments and enclosed ribozymes, tRNAs with selected amino acids, and RNA which became mRNA. Is this a pre-cell or pre-virus (Figure 1) ? Patel et al. (2015) demonstrated that the building blocks of life, ribonucleotides, lipids and amino acids, can be formed from C, H, O, P, N, S in a "one pot" synthesis. This study can be regarded as a follow-up study of the classical Urey-Miller in vitro synthesis of biomolecules (Miller, 1953; Miller and Urey, 1959) . Transition from the RNA to the DNA world was promoted by the formation of the reverse transcriptase. The enzyme was first described in retroviruses but it is almost ubiquitous and found in numerous cellular species, many of which with unknown functions (Simon and Zimmerly, 2008; Lescot et al., 2016) . It is an important link between the RNA and the DNA worlds. The name reverse transcriptase is historical and irritating because it is the "real" transcriptase during the transition from the RNA to the DNA world. Similarly, the ribonuclease H (RNase H) is an essential enzyme of retroviruses (Mölling et al., 1971) . The RNase H turned out to be one of the five most frequent and ancient proteins (Ma et al., 2008 ) that belongs to a superfamily of more than sixty different unique representatives and 152 families with numerous functions (Majorek et al., 2014) .
Some of the many tRNAs can become loaded with amino acids. There are viruses containing tRNA-like structures (TLS), resembling these early RNAs (Dreher, 2009) . The TLS of these viruses typically bind to a single amino acid. TLS-viruses include plant viruses, such as Turnip yellow mosaic virus, in Peanut clump virus, Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), and Brome mosaic virus. Only half a tRNA is found in Narnaviruses of fungi. The amino acids known to be components of tRNA-like viruses are valine, histidine and tyrosine. The structures were also designated as "mimicry, " enhancing translation (Dreher, 2009 (Dreher, , 2010 . They look like "frozen" precursor-like elements for protein synthesis. This combination of a partial tRNA linked to one amino acid can be interpreted as an evolutionary early step toward protein synthesis, trapped in a viral element.
Ribozymes are related to the protein-free viroids. Viroids are virus-like elements that belong to the virosphere, the world of viruses (Chela-Flores, 1994) . Viroids lack protein coats and therefore were initially not designated as viruses but virus-like viroids when they were discovered in 1971 by Theodor Diener. He described viroids as "living fossils" (Diener, 2016) (Figure 2) .
From infected potatoes, Diener isolated the Potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd) whose genome was about a 100-fold smaller than those of viruses known at that time. The viroids known today are ranging from 246 to 467 nucleotides. They contain circular single-stranded RNA, are protein-free and self-replicating with no genetic information, but only structural FIGURE 2 | Viroids are hairpin-loop structures and are shown schematically and as electron micrograph. Viroids are, like ribozymes, without genetic information and play major biological roles today in plant diseases, in carnation flowers, in liver cancer, as catalyst of protein synthesis in ribosomes and as circular regulatory RNAs, as "sponges" for other regulatory RNAs.
information in the form of hairpin-loops (Riesner et al., 1979) . They can generate copies of themselves in the appropriate environment. They were designated as the "frontiers of life" (Flores et al., 2014) .
The knowledge of virus composition was based on TMV and its crystallization by Wendell Stanley in 1935 (Pennazio and Roggero, 2000) . The genome of TMV is protein-coding singlestranded RNA of about 6,400 nucleotides that is enclosed by a rod-like protein coat. Viroids, in contrast, do not encode proteins and lack coats but they are closely related to viruses. Viroids can lose their autonomy and rely on host RNA polymerases to replicate, are capable of infecting plants and many are economically important pathogens. There are two families, the nucleus-replicating Pospiviroidae such as PSTVd and the chloroplast-replicating Avsunviroidae like the Avocado sunblotch viroid (ASBVd). Their replication requires host enzymes. Thus, autonomy is replaced by dependence on host enzymes and an intracellular lifestyle.
Most viroids are often enzymatically active ribozymes -yet they are examples that this trait can get lost as a result of changing environmental conditions. Loss of ribozyme activity is a functional, not a genetic loss. Only the nuclear variants, the Pospiviroidae, can lose their ribozyme activity and use the cellular RNase III enzyme for their replication. In contrast, the Avsunviroidae are still active hammerhead ribozymes. Thus, inside the nucleus of a host cell, the enzymatic RNA function can become unnecessary. Not genes, but a function, the catalytic activity, gets lost.
Viroids did apparently not gain genes but cooperated for a more complex lifestyle. For example, Carnation small viroid-like RNA (CarSV RNA) cooperates with a retrovirus and is accompanied by a homologous DNA generated by a reverse transcriptase. This enzyme presumably originates from a pararetrovirus of plants. Pararetroviruses package virus particles at a different stage during replication than retroviruses, the DNA, not the RNA. This unique combination between two viral elements has so far only been detected with CarSV in carnation flowers (Flores et al., 2005 (Flores et al., , 2014 . Why did such a cooperation evolve -perhaps by breeding gardeners? RNA is sensitive to degradation; therefore, genetic increase and growth of the genome may not be favorable energetically -at least not in plants. Gain of function is, in this case, cooperation.
The circular RNA (circRNA) is related to ribozymes/viroids as a chief regulator of other regulatory RNAs, a "sponge" absorbing small RNAs. Micro RNAs (miRNAs) are post-transcriptional regulators that are affected by the presence of circRNAs. circRNAs were detected in human and mouse brains and testes as well as in plants. They can bind 70 conserved miRNAs in a cell and amount up to 25,000 molecules (Hansen et al., 2013) . Their structure is reminiscent of catalytically active ribozymes.
There is an exceptional viroid that gained coding information and entered the human liver (Taylor, 2009) . The viroid is known as hepatitis delta virus (HDV). It has the smallest genome of any known animal virus of about 1,680 nucleotides. It has properties typical of viroids, since it contains circRNA, forms similar hairpin-loops and replicates in the nucleus using host enzymes. Two polymerases have to redirect their specificity from DNA to RNA to generate the HDV genome and antigenome. Both of them have ribozyme activity. In contrast to other ribozymes, HDV encodes a protein, the hepatitis delta antigen (HDVAg) that occurs in two forms, the small-HDVAg (24 kDa) supporting replication and the large-HDVAg (27 kDa) that helps virion assembly. The gene was presumably picked up from the host cell by recombination of HDV's mRNA intermediate with a host mRNA. Transmission depends on a helper virus, the Hepatitis B virus (HBV), which delivers the coat (Taylor, 2009 ) Does packaging by a helper virus protect the genome and thereby allow for a larger viroid to exist?
In plants, viroids may not be able to become bigger possibly due to their sensitivity to degradation -but they cannot become much smaller either. Only a single viroid is known that is completely composed of protein-coding RNA with triplets (AbouHaidar et al., 2014). Viroids and related replicating RNAs are error-prone replicating units and the error frequency imposes a certain minimal size onto them, as they would otherwise become extinct. This mechanism has been described as "error catastrophe, " which prevents survival (Eigen, 1971 (Eigen, , 2013 . The viroids and related RNAs are the smallest known replicons. Smaller ones would become extinct in the absence of repair systems.
In summary, RNA can catalyze many reactions. Protein enzymes which may have evolved later have higher catalytic activities. Ribozymes are carriers of information, but do not require coding genes. Information is stored in their sequence and structure. Thus, replication of an initial RNA is followed by flow of information, from DNA to RNA to protein, as described the Central Dogma (Crick, 1968) . Even an information flow from protein to DNA has been described for some archaeal proteins (Béguin et al., 2015) . The DNA-protein world contains numerous ncRNAs with key functions. ncRNA may serve as a model compound for the origin of life on other planets. Hereby not the chemical composition of this molecule is of prime relevance, but its simplicity and multifunctionality. Furthermore, RNA is software and hardware in a single molecule, which makes it unique in our world. There are other scenarios besides the here discussed "virus-first, " such as "protein-first", "metabolism-fist" or the "lipid world" (Segré et al., 2001; Andras and Andras, 2005; Vasas et al., 2010; Moelling, 2012) . Some of these alternative concepts were built on phylogenomics, the reconstruction of the tree of life by genome sequencing (Delsuc et al., 2005) . Surprisingly, it was Sir Francis Crick, one of the discoverers of the DNA double-helix, who stated that he would not be surprised about a world completely built of RNA. A similar prediction was made by Walter Gilbert (Crick, 1968; Gilbert, 1986) . What a vision! Our world was almost 50 years later defined as "RNAprotein" world (Altman, 2013) . One can speculate our world was built of ribozymes or viroids, which means "viruses first."
ncRNAs appear as relics from the past RNA world, before DNA, the genetic code and proteins evolved. However, ncRNA is essential in our biological DNA world today. It is possible to produce such ncRNA today in the test tube by loss of genic information from protein-coding RNA. This reduction to ncRNA was demonstrated in vitro with phage RNA. Phage Qβ genomic RNA, 4,217 nucleotides in length, was incubated in the presence of Qβ replicase, free nucleotides and salts, a rich milieu in the test tube. The RNA was allowed to replicate by means of the Qβ replicase. Serial transfer of aliquots to fresh medium led to ever faster replication rates and reduction of genomic size, down to 218 nucleotides of ncRNA in 74 generations. This study demonstrated that, depending on environmental conditions, an extreme gene reduction can take place. This experiment performed in 1965 was designated as "Spiegelman's Monster." Coding RNA became replicating ncRNA (Spiegelman et al., 1965; Kacian et al., 1972) ! Manfred Eigen extended this experiment and demonstrated further that a mixture containing no RNA to start with but only ribonucleotides and the Qβ replicase can under the right conditions in a test tube spontaneously generate self-replicating ncRNA. This evolved into a form similar to Spiegelman's Monster. The presence of the replicase enzyme was still necessary in these studies. Furthermore, a change in enzyme concentration and addition of short RNAs or an RNA intercalator influenced the arising RNA population (Sumper and Luce, 1975; Eigen, 2013) . Thus, the complexity of genomes depends on the environment: poor conditions lead to increased complexity and rich environments to reduced complexity.
The process demonstrated in this experiment with viral components indicates that reversion to simplicity, reduction in size, loss of genetic information and speed in replication can be major forces of life, even though this appears to be like a reversion of evolution. The experiment can perhaps be generalized from the test tube to a principle, that the most successful survivors on our planet are the viruses and microorganisms, which became the most abundant entities. Perhaps life can start from there again.
These studies raise the question of how RNA molecules can become longer, if the small polymers become smaller and smaller, replicate faster and outcompete longer ones. This may be overcome by heat flow across an open pore in submerged rocks, which concentrates replicating oligonucleotides from a constant feeding flow and selection for longer strands. This has been described for an increase from 100 to 1,000 nucleotides in vitro. RNA molecules shorter than 75 nucleotides will die out (Kreysing et al., 2015) . Could a poor environment lead to an increase of complexity? This could be tested. Ribozymes were shown to grow in size by uptake of genes, as demonstrated for HDV (Taylor, 2009 ).
An interesting recent unexpected example supporting the notion that environmental conditions influence genetic complexity, is the human gut microbiome. Its complexity increases with diverse food, while uniform rich food reduces its diversity and may lead to diseases such as obesity. Colonization of the human intestinal tract starts at birth. A few dozen bacterial and viral/phage species are conserved between individuals (core sequences) as a stable composition (Broecker et al., 2016c . Dysbiosis has been observed in several chronic diseases and in obesity, a loss of bacterial richness and diversity. Nutrition under affluent conditions with sugar-rich food contributes to obesity, which results in a significant reduction of the complexity of the microbiome. This reduction is difficult to revert (Cotillard et al., 2013; Le Chatelier et al., 2013) . The gut microbiome in human patients with obesity is reminiscent of the gene reduction described in the Spiegelman's Monster experiment: reduction of genes in a rich environment.
The reduction of the complexity of the microbiome is in part attributed to the action of phages, which under such conditions, defined as stress, lyse the bacteria. Fecal microbiota transplantation can even be replaced by soluble fractions containing phages or metabolites from the donor without bacteria (Ott et al., 2017) . Analogously, the most highly complex microbiomes are found in indigenous human tribes in Africa, which live on a broad variety of different nutrients. It is a slow process, though, to increase gut microbiota complexity by diverse nutrition. The obesity-associated microbiota that survive are fitter and more difficult to counteract. Urbanization and westernization of the diet is associated with a loss of microbial biodiversity, loss of microbial organisms and genes (Segata, 2015) .
To understand the mechanism and driving force for genome reduction, deletion rates were tested by insertion of an indicator gene into the Salmonella enterica genome. The loss of the indicator gene was monitored by serial passage in rich medium. After 1,000 generations about 25% of the deletions caused increased bacterial fitness. Deletions resulted in smaller genomes with reduced or absence of DNA repair genes (Koskiniemi et al., 2012) . Gene loss conferred a higher fitness to the bacteria under these experimental conditions.
The recently discovered mimiviruses and other giant viruses are worth considering for understanding the evolution of life with respect to the contribution of viruses. Their hosts are, for example, Acanthamoeba, Chlorella, and Coccolithus algae (Emiliania huxleyi), but also corals or sponges as discussed more recently. Mimiviruses were first discovered in cooling water towers in Bradford, United Kingdom in 2003 with about 1,000 genes, most of which unrelated to previously known genes. Mimiviruses have received attention because they contain elements that were considered hallmarks of living cells, not of viruses, such as elements required for protein synthesis, tRNAs and amino acid transferases. The mimiviruses harbor these building blocks as incomplete sets not sufficient for independent protein synthesis as bacteria or archaea can perform, preventing them from leading an autonomous life (La Scola et al., 2003 Scola et al., , 2008 . They are larger than some bacteria. Giant viruses can be looked at as being on an evolutionary path toward a cellular organism. Alternatively, they may have evolved from a cellular organism by loss of genetic information (Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015) . Giant viruses have frequently taken up genes from their hosts by horizontal gene transfer (HGT) (La Scola et al., 2008; Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015; Colson et al., 2018) . A graph on genome sizes shows that mimiviruses and bacteria overlap in size, indicating a continuous transition between viruses and bacteria and between living and non-living worlds (based on Holmes, 2011) (Figure 3) . Other giant viruses, such as megaviruses, were discovered in the ocean of Chile with 1,120 genes. Most recently the Klosneuvirus was identified in the sewage of the monastery Klosterneuburg in Austria in 2017 with 1.57 million (mio) basepairs (Mitch, 2017) . Pithovirus sibericum is the largest among giant viruses discovered to date with a diameter of 1.5 microns, a genome of 470,000 bp with 467 putative genes, 1.6 microns in length, and it is presumably 30,000 years old as it was recovered from permafrost in Siberia (Legendre et al., 2014) . The smaller Pandoraviruses with 1 micron in length have five times larger genomes, 2,500,000 bp (Philippe et al., 2013) (Figure 3) .
The giant viruses can even be hosts to smaller viruses, the virophages, reminiscent of bacteriophages, the viruses of bacteria. These virophages such as Sputnik are only 50 nm in size with 18,343 bp of circular dsDNA and 21 predicted proteincoding genes. They replicate in viral factories and consume the resources of the mimivirus, thereby destroying it. Some, virophages can even integrate into the genome of the cellular host and can be reactivated when the host is infected by giant viruses. Thus, giant viruses suggest that viruses are close to living entities or may have been alive (La Scola et al., 2008; Fischer and Hackl, 2016) . In biology it is common to distinguish between living and dead matter by the ability to synthesize proteins and replicate autonomously. The giant viruses may be considered as missing link between the two, because they harbor "almost" the protein synthesis apparatus. The transition from living to the non-living world is continuous, not separated by a sharp borderline (Figure 3) .
Viruses are not considered alive by most of the scientific community and as written in textbooks, because they cannot replicate autonomously. Yet some of the giant viruses are equipped with almost all components of the protein synthesis machinery close to bacteria suggesting that they belong to the living matter (Schulz et al., 2017) . The ribozymes may have been the earliest replicating entity. Perhaps also other viruses were initially more independent of the early Earth than they are today. As described in Figure 1 there may have been initially no major difference between an early virus or an early cell. Only later viruses may have given up their autonomous replication and became parasites -as has been described for some bacteria (see below).
Efforts have been made to identify the smallest living cell that is still autonomously replicating. Among the presumably smallest naturally occurring bacteria is Pelagibacter ubique of the SAR11 clade of bacteria (Giovannoni, 2017) , which was discovered in 1990. It is an alpha-proteobacterium with 1,389 genes present ubiquitously in all oceans. It can reach up to 10 28 free living cells in total and represents about 25% of microbial plankton cells. Very little of its DNA is non-coding. It harbors podophage-type phages, designated as "pelagiphage" (Zhao et al., 2013) . This small bacterium was designated as the most common organism on the planet. Why is it so successful? This autonomous bacterium is smaller than some parasitic giant viruses. Craig Venter, who first succeeded in sequencing the human genome, tried to minimize the putative smallest genome of a living species, from Mycoplasma mycoides, a parasitic bacterium that lives in ruminants (Gibson et al., 2008 (Gibson et al., , 2010 . His group synthesized a genome of 531,000 bp with 473 genes, 149 of them (32%) with unknown functions (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Among the smallest parasitic living organisms is Nanoarchaeum equitans. It is a thermophile archaeon which lives at 80 • C and at pH 6 with 2% salt (Huber et al., 2003) . Its genome has a size of 490,000 bp and encodes 540 genes. N. equitans is an obligate symbiont of a bigger archaeon, Ignicoccus riding on it as on a horse, hence the name (Huber et al., 2003) .
The world of viruses covers a range of three logs in size of their genomes: from zero genes to about 2,500 genes amounting to about 2,500,000 bp of DNA. The zero-gene viroids are about 300 bases in length (Figure 3) .
The virosphere is the most successful reservoir of biological entities on our planet in terms of numbers of particles, speed of replication, growth rates, and sequence space. There are about 10 33 viruses on our planet and they are present in every single existing species (Suttle, 2005) .
There is no living species without viruses! Viruses also occur freely in the oceans, in the soil, in clouds up to the stratosphere and higher, to at least 300 km in altitude. They populate the human intestine, birth canal, and the outside of the body as protective layer against microbial populations. Microbes contain phages that are activated during stress conditions such as lack of nutrients, change in temperatures, lack of space and other changes of environmental conditions.
One of the most earth-shaking papers of this century was the publication of the human genome sequence (Lander et al., 2001) . About half, possibly even two-thirds of the sequence are composed of more or less complete endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) and related retroelements (REs) (de Koning et al., 2011) . REs amplify via copy-and-paste mechanisms involving a reverse transcriptase step from an RNA intermediate into DNA. In addition, DNA transposable elements (TEs) move by a cutand-paste mechanism. The origin of REs is being discussed as remnants of ancient retroviral germline infections that became evolutionarily fixed in the genome. About 450,000 human ERV (HERV) elements constitute about 8% of the human genome consisting of hallmark retroviral elements like the gag, pol, env genes and flanking long terminal repeats (LTR) that act as promoters (Lander et al., 2001) . Howard Temin, one of the discoverers of the reverse transcriptase, in 1985 already described endogenous retrovirus-like elements, which he estimated to about 10% of the human and mouse genome sequence (Temin, 1985) . The actual number is about 45% as estimated today (Lander et al., 2001) . In some genes such as the Protein Kinase Inhibitor B (PKIB) gene we determined about 70% retrovirusrelated sequences (Moelling and Broecker, 2015) . Is there a limit? Could it have been 100%? Retroviruses are estimated to have entered the lineage of the mammalian genome 550 million years ago (MYA) (Hayward, 2017) . Older ERV sequences may exist but are unrecognizable today due to the accumulation of mutations.
ERVs undergo mutations, deletions or homologous recombination events with large deletions and can become as short as solo LTR elements, which are a few hundred bp in length -the left-overs from full-length retroviral genomes of about 10,000 bp. The LTR promoters can deregulate neighboring genes. Homologous recombination events may be considered as gene loss or gene reduction events. It is the assumption that the ERVs, which were no longer needed for host cell defense, were no longer selected for by evolution and consequently deleted as unnecessary consumers of energy.
Eugene Koonin points out that infection and integration are unique events occurring at a fast pace, while loss and gene reduction may take much longer time frames (Wolf and Koonin, 2013) .
A frequent gene reduction of eukaryotic genomes is the loss of the viral envelope protein encoded by the env gene. Without a coat, retroviruses can no longer leave the cell and infect other cells. They lose mobility and become obligatory intracellular elements. Helper viruses can supply envelope proteins in trans and mobilize the viruses. TEs or REs can be regarded as examples of coat-free intracellular virus relics -or could it have been the other way round, perhaps precursors of full-length retroviruses?
These elements can be amplified intracellularly and modify the host genomes by integration with the potential danger of gene disruption and genetic changes. REs can lead to gene duplications and pseudogene development, with one copy for stable conservation of acquired functions and the other one for innovations (Cotton and Page, 2005) . Such duplications constitute large amounts of mammalian genomes (Zhang, 2003) . Retroviruses have an RNase H moiety duplication, one of which serves as a catalytically inactive linker between the RT polymerase and the enzymatically active RNase H (Xiong and Eickbush, 1990; Malik and Eickbush, 2001; Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) . This gene duplication dates back to 500 mio years (Cotton and Page, 2005) .
Gene duplications are a common cause of cancer, which often occurs only in the genome of the cancer cell itself, less affecting offsprings. Myc, Myb, ErbB2, Ras, and Raf are oncogenes amplified in diverse types of human cancers (Vogelstein and Kinzler, 2002) . The ability of retroviruses to integrate makes them distinct from endosymbionts which stay separate. Yet the net result is very similar, acquisition of new genetic information, which is transmitted to the next generation, if the germline is infected and endogenization of the virus occurred.
Viral integration is not limited to eukaryotic cells but also a mechanism in prokaryotes for maintenance of the lysogenic state of phages inside bacteria.
Also, for other eukaryotic viruses such as HBV, the envelope surface antigen BHsAg can be deleted, which leads to an obligatory intracellular life style for the virus, which especially in the presence of HCV promotes cancer (Yang et al., 2016) .
HIV has been shown to rapidly lose one of its auxiliary genes, nef, originally for negative factor. The gene was lost within a rather low number of passages of the virus grown under tissue culture conditions by selection for high virus titer producing cells. Deletion of nef resulted in a significant increase of the virus titer in culture -hence the name. The nef gene product was of no need inside tissue culture cells, rather it was inhibitory for replication. However, it is essential for pathogenicity in animals, and subsequently nef was reinterpreted as "necessary factor" (Flint, 2015) .
Also, the human hosts of HIV can lose a significant terminal portion of a seven transmembrane receptor in lymphocytes, the primary target cell for HIV entry and for virus uptake. This molecule, the CCR5 cytokine receptor is truncated by 32 carboxy-terminal amino acids (CCR5-32), disabling the receptor functionally. The allele frequency of the mutant CCR5-32 mutant is about 10% in the European population, making these people resistant to HIV infections (Solloch et al., 2017) . This gene loss in Europeans has been shown to make the individuals resistant not only against HIV infection but also against malaria. This may have been the selective pressure in the past before HIV/AIDS arose. No side effect for humans lacking this gene has been described (Galvani and Slatkin, 2003) .
Viruses have been proven to be drivers of evolution (Villarreal and Witzany, 2010) , including the human genome, which by at least 45% is composed of sequences related to retroviruses. In addition, endogenized retroviruses supplied the syncytin genes that are essential for the development of the mammalian placenta, and allowed the growth of embryos without its rejection by the maternal immune system (Dupressoir et al., 2012) . Thus, the same property which causes immunodeficiency in HIV-infected patients and leads to AIDS causes syncytia formation, cell fusion after infection by a retrovirus. Viruses have also been proposed to be at the origin of the evolution of adaptive immunity (Villarreal, 2009 ). Thus, viruses shaped genomes by supplying essential genes and mechanisms.
Endogenization of retroviruses has occurred in the mammalian genomes for at least 550 mio years (Hayward, 2017) . If the integrated ERVs did not provide any selective advantage, they deteriorated and accumulated mutations with loss of function. This was directly proven by reconstruction of an infectious retrovirus from the consensus sequence of 9 defective endogenous virus sequences, designated as Phoenix. The virus was expressed from a constructed synthetic DNA clone in cell culture and formed virus particles identified by high resolution microscopic analysis (Dewannieux and Heidmann, 2013) .
The koalas in Australia are currently undergoing endogenization of a retrovirus (koala retrovirus, KoRV) in "real time" and demonstrate possible consequences for immunity. In the early 1900s, some individuals were transferred to islands, including Kangaroo Island, close to the Australian mainland for repopulation purposes, as koalas were threatened to become extinct. Today, the majority of the koala population is infected by KoRV, which is closely related to the Gibbon ape leukemia virus (GALV). Yet, koalas isolated on Kangaroo Island are KoRV negative, which allows dating the introduction of KoRV into the koala population to about one hundred years ago. Many of the infected koalas fell ill and died, yet some populations became resistant within about 100 years, corresponding to about 10 generations. The koalas likely developed resistance due to the integrated DNA proviruses. The retrovirus is transmitted as exogenous as well as endogenous virus, similar to the Jaagsiekte sheep retrovirus (JSRV), whereby the endogenized viruses protect with a viral gene product, such as Env, against de novo infections by "superinfection exclusion" (Tarlinton, 2012) . The contribution of retroviruses to the antiviral defense is striking, since all retroviral genes have analogous genes in the siRNA/RNAi defense mechanism of eukaryotic cells (Moelling et al., 2006) .
Retroviruses can protect against infection by other related viruses, for example, by expressing Env proteins that block cellsurface receptors (Villarreal, 2011) . A comparable mechanism protects bacterial cells against DNA phages, by integrated phage DNA fragments that are transcribed into mRNA and hybridize to incoming new DNA phages and thereby lead to their destruction by hybrid-specific nucleases, CRISPR/Cas immunity (Charpentier and Doudna, 2013) . It is often not realized that immunity acquisition in bacteria and mammalian cells follow analogous mechanisms (Figure 4) .
Integration of retroviruses normally occurs in somatic cells after infection as an obligatory step during the viral life cycle. Infection of germline cells can lead to transmission to the next generation and ultimately result in inherited resistance. Endogenized retroviruses likely caused resistance FIGURE 4 | Viruses protect against viruses: retroviruses protect a cell against a new infection by a similar virus designated as "superinfection exclusion" or viral interference. This is mediated by viral gene products such as proteins or nucleic acids. Similarly, phages protect against phages: superinfection of bacteria is prevented by CRISPR/Cas RNA originating from previous infections. The mechanisms of defense against viruses and phages are analogous. Protection by viruses or phages against superinfections represents cellular defense and acquired immunity. The four examples are discussed in the text.
to the exogenous counterparts. Similarly, resistance to Simian Immune Deficiency virus (SIV) in some monkey species may be explained by endogenization (Li et al., 2017 (Li et al., , 2018 . In the case of phages and their prokaryotic hosts the mechanism is described as CRISPR/Cas, which follow analogous principles of "endogenization" of incoming genetic material for subsequent exclusion.
One may speculate that HIV may also eventually become endogenized into the human genome. There is some evidence that HIV can infect human germline cells and can be transmitted to the embryonic genome (Wang et al., 2011) . How long this may take is not known -10 generations?
The loss of function of ERVs can occur by mutations, deletions of the env or other genes and ultimately all coding genes by homologous recombination, leaving behind only one LTR. The number of retrovirus-like elements add up to about 450,000, corresponding to 8% of the human genome (Lander et al., 2001; Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). The promoter regions were analyzed for their contribution to cancer by activating neighboring genes -as a consequence of a former retrovirus infection. Indeed, activated cellular genes by "downstream promotion" were identified in animal studies with activation of the myc gene as one of many examples, leading to chronic, not acute development of cancer (Ott et al., 2013) . As a general mechanism for human cancer today the LTRs are, however, not identified as a major culprit. Most of the ERVs we find today have been integrated during evolution in introns or other regions where their presence is relatively harmless. Did the other ones result in death of the carriers which disappeared? The effects of LTRs on the expression levels of neighboring host genes was studied with the endogenous human virus, HERV-K, as a possible cause of cancer, but this appears not to be a general phenomenon (Broecker et al., 2016b) . As shown for the koalas, ERVs can confer immunity to viral infections (Feschotte and Gilbert, 2012) .
A related ERV, HERV-H, was shown to produce an RNA that keeps early embryonic cells pluripotent and even revert adult cells to regain pluripotency (Grow et al., 2015) . Thus, the role of ERVs may be more complex than we presently know.
Transposable elements and REs that lost the ability of cellular transmission by deletion of the coat protein majorly contribute to genetic complexity of host cells. They are "locked" inside the cells and are major drivers of the increase of genetic complexity (Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). One could speculate that these intracellular elements are replicationincompetent retroviruses lacking coats (Lander et al., 2001) . Bats transmit viruses such as Ebola and SARS coronavirus without suffering from disease (Beltz, 2018) . Even RNA viruses such as Bornaviruses have been shown to integrate by illegitimate reverse transcription, possibly also supplying immunity against superinfection (Katzourakis and Gifford, 2010) .
There are two prominent events that significantly contributed to the success of life and the formation of cells. Both of them are associated with gene reduction. This phenomenon may play a role for the evolution of viruses from autonomous to parasitic lifestyles. In the 1960s Lynn Margulis proposed an extracellular origin for mitochondria (Margulis, 1970 (Margulis, , 1993 ). An ancestral cell, perhaps an archaeon, was infected by an anaerobic bacterium, which gave rise to mitochondria. Similarly, cyanobacteria formed the chloroplasts in modern plant cells. Mitochondria arose around 1.45 billion years ago (BYA) (Embley and Martin, 2006) . Mitochondria and chloroplasts are the most striking examples for a change in lifestyle from autonomous bacteria to endosymbionts. This transition is often considered as extremely rare and a hallmark of evolution of life on our planet. However, there are many other obligate intracellular parasites such as Rickettsia, Chlamydia trachomatis, Coxiella burnetii (the causative agent of Q fever), Mycobacterium leprae, M. tuberculosis, and M. mycoides (Beare et al., 2006) .
The change of lifestyle of the endosymbionts in the two cases of mitochondria and chloroplasts is striking. Both of them drastically reduced their genetic make-up. Mitochondria contain less than 37 genes, left from the original about 3,000 genes. Is endogenization of retroviruses, the ERVs, which are integrated into germline cells, related to endosymbiosis? Are these endosymbionts models for the transition from autonomous lifestyle to a parasitic life-which may have taken place with viruses? A more recent typical example for a reductive evolution are Rickettsia. These bacteria were assumed for some time to be viruses because of their obligatory intracellular parasitic existence. Rickettsia have evolved from autonomously replicating bacteria. Reductive evolution of endosymbionts can yield bacteria with tiny genomes on the expense of autonomous extracellular life. Their genomes are 1.11 mio bp in length with about 834 protein-coding genes, and loss of 24% by reductive evolution (Ogata et al., 2001) . Rickettsia may have some relationship with cyanobacteria, which are considered as the major symbionts.
Can one speculate that viruses may have been autonomous entities initially? Viroids may have undergone transition from autonomy to parasites, just as shown for mitochondria, chloroplasts or Rickettsia? To which extent have viruses been autonomous and independent of cellular metabolisms originally -and contributed to the origin of cells? Could they only later have lost their autonomy and become parasitic?
Viruses are minimalistic in their composition and must have undergone stringent gene reductions (Flint, 2015) . How small can their genomes become? Most coding RNA viruses still contain regulatory elements, ncRNA at the 3 and 5 terminal regions for ribosomal entry, protein synthesis, transcriptional regulation, and others.
A subgroup of retroviruses is an interesting example in respect to simultaneous loss and gain of genetic information. The oncogenic retroviruses or tumorviruses can recombine with cellular genes which under the promoters of retroviruses can become oncogenes and drivers of cancer. About a hundred oncogenes have been selected for in the laboratories and studied over decades for understanding the molecular mechanisms of cancer. Selection for growth advantages of the host cells led to the discovery of the fastest growth-promoting oncogenes we know today, such as Ras, Raf, ErbB or Myc, which are in part successful targets for anticancer drugs (Moelling et al., 1984) .
These oncogenes were in most cases taken up by the retroviruses at the expense of structural (gag), replicating (pol) or envelope (env) genes, and are often expressed as fusion proteins with Gag. Thus, oncogenic retroviruses are obligatory intracellular defective viruses and were selected for in the laboratory by researchers for the oncogenes with the most potent growth promoting ability. They need the supply of replicatory genes in trans from co-infecting helper viruses to infect other cells (Flint, 2015) . Retroviruses are able to pick up cellular genes, transfer and integrate them into neighboring cells. Some strains of Rous sarcoma virus maintain replication competent when carrying the cell-derived src (for sarcoma) oncogene encoding a protein of 536 amino acids that apparently can fit into the retroviral particle along with the full-size viral genome (Broecker et al., 2016a) . Spatial reasons may have influenced the formation of oncogenic retroviruses and limited their size and thereby led to their defective phenotypes.
There are indications that the uncontrolled activity of (retro)transposons in germline cells can result in diseases such as male infertility -presumably by "error catastrophe, " caused by too many transposition events. In mammals, piRNAs tame transposon activity by means of the RNase H activity of PIWI proteins during spermatogenesis (Girard et al., 2006) .
Only a minority of viruses are pathogens; most of them do not cause diseases. On the contrary, they are most important as drivers of evolution, as transmitters of genetic material, as innovative agents. In particular, the RNA viruses are the most innovative ones. Some of them are pathogenic and dangerous, such as HIV or influenza virus, or viroids in plants. RNA viruses are able to change so rapidly that the host immune system is unable to counteract the infection. Pathogenicity arises when environmental conditions change, for instance, when a virus enters a new organism or species.
Increase of cellular complexity by viruses is an important feature of evolution. Such major evolutionary changes are recently taken as arguments against the evolutionary theory by Charles Darwin who considered gradual changes, small increments by mutations as the main basis for selection and evolution. New criticism is addressing this thinking, considering larger changes as evolutionary drivers. Such changes arise by many complex phenomena such as endosymbiosis, infection by prokaryotes, viruses and fungi, recombination of genes, HGT, infections, sex. Dramatic changes such as endosymbiosis or pathogen infections extend Darwin's concept of evolution.
There are numerous examples for the contribution of viruses to the evolution of life since at least as long as 550 MYA (Hayward, 2017) . But genetic noise through random mutations does not allow us to go back to the origin of life. It may not be impossible that the earliest compartment was indistinguishable, either a pre-cell or a pre-virus. By analogy one may speculate that at some point autonomous viruses gave up independence for an obligatory intracellular life -as has been described for mitochondria and chloroplasts but also intracellular bacteria such as Rickettsia. This speculation is based on the concept that early life must have started simple and with high genetic variability and then became more complex. But complexity can be given up for a less energy consuming lifestyle with small genomes and high speed of replication (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . Therefore, the question may be repeated: "Are viruses our oldest ancestors?" Some fossil life can be partially reproduced in vitro by Spiegelman's Monster and Eigen's follow-up experiments, explaining the great surviving potential of simple ncRNA.
Viruses can be pathogens, but their recognition as primarily causing diseases is wrong. This notion is based on the history of viruses in medicine, as explained in a book entitled "Viruses: More Friends Than Foes" (Moelling, 2017) . The scenario described here focuses on viruses as drivers of evolution.
The early RNA world gained interest 20-30 years ago as evidenced by the references provided above. Surprisingly, there are scientists who still believe in the "pansperm hypothesis" and think that retroviruses are of extraterrestric origin (Steele et al., 2018) . The recent interest in the origin of life arose from the newly discovered exoplanets whose number increases daily -and which may be as numerous as 10 25 . Thus, pure statistics make some people believe that there is extraterrestrial life.
The extraterrestric life is mimicked in laboratories on Earth with many assumptions -perhaps this overview stimulates some thinking. The discussion presented here should be taken as concept about simple replicating and evolving entities possibly arising from different building blocks in other environments, with structure being more relevant than sequence. | How are the ribozymes able to replicate, join and create peptide bonds? | 1,181 | They can polymerize progeny chemically, allow for mutations to occur and can evolve. One molecule serves as catalyst, the other one as substrate. Replication of ribozymes was demonstrated in the test tube (Lincoln and Joyce, 2009) . Ribozymes can form peptide bonds between amino acids (Zhang and Cech, 1997) . Thus, small peptides were available by ribozyme activity. | 2,958 |
1,690 | Viruses and Evolution – Viruses First? A Personal Perspective
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433886/
SHA: f3b9fc0f8e0a431366196d3e835e1ec368b379d1
Authors: Moelling, Karin; Broecker, Felix
Date: 2019-03-19
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00523
License: cc-by
Abstract: The discovery of exoplanets within putative habitable zones revolutionized astrobiology in recent years. It stimulated interest in the question about the origin of life and its evolution. Here, we discuss what the roles of viruses might have been at the beginning of life and during evolution. Viruses are the most abundant biological entities on Earth. They are present everywhere, in our surrounding, the oceans, the soil and in every living being. Retroviruses contributed to about half of our genomic sequences and to the evolution of the mammalian placenta. Contemporary viruses reflect evolution ranging from the RNA world to the DNA-protein world. How far back can we trace their contribution? Earliest replicating and evolving entities are the ribozymes or viroids fulfilling several criteria of life. RNA can perform many aspects of life and influences our gene expression until today. The simplest structures with non-protein-coding information may represent models of life built on structural, not genetic information. Viruses today are obligatory parasites depending on host cells. Examples of how an independent lifestyle might have been lost include mitochondria, chloroplasts, Rickettsia and others, which used to be autonomous bacteria and became intracellular parasites or endosymbionts, thereby losing most of their genes. Even in vitro the loss of genes can be recapitulated all the way from coding to non-coding RNA. Furthermore, the giant viruses may indicate that there is no sharp border between living and non-living entities but an evolutionary continuum. Here, it is discussed how viruses can lose and gain genes, and that they are essential drivers of evolution. This discussion may stimulate the thinking about viruses as early possible forms of life. Apart from our view “viruses first”, there are others such as “proteins first” and “metabolism first.”
Text: Mycoplasma mycoides by systematic deletion of individual genes resulted in a synthetic minimal genome of 473 genes (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Can one consider simpler living entities?
There are elements with zero genes that fulfill many criteria for early life: ribozymes, catalytic RNAs closely related to viroids. They were recovered in vitro from 10 15 molecules (aptamers), 220 nucleotides in length, by 10 rounds of selection. Among the many RNA species present in this collection of quasispecies RNAs were catalytically active members, enzymatically active ribozymes. The sequence space for 220-mer RNAs is about 3 × 10 132 (Eigen, 1971; Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Brackett and Dieckmann, 2006) .
The selected ribozymes were able to replicate, cleave, join, and form peptide bonds. They can polymerize progeny chemically, allow for mutations to occur and can evolve. One molecule serves as catalyst, the other one as substrate. Replication of ribozymes was demonstrated in the test tube (Lincoln and Joyce, 2009) . Ribozymes can form peptide bonds between amino acids (Zhang and Cech, 1997) . Thus, small peptides were available by ribozyme activity. Consequently, an RNA modification has been proposed as peptide nucleic acid (PNA), with more stable peptide bonds instead of phosphodiester bonds (Zhang and Cech, 1997; Joyce, 2002) . Replication of RNA molecules can be performed chemically from RNA without polymerase enzymes. In addition, deoxyribozymes can form from ribonucleotides (Wilson and Szostak, 1999) . Thus, DNA can arise from RNA chemically, without the key protein enzyme, the reverse transcriptase.
An entire living world is possible from non-coding RNA (ncRNA) before evolution of the genetic code and protein enzymes. Ribozymes naturally consist of circular single-stranded RNAs (Orgel, 2004) . They lack the genetic triplet code and do not encode proteins. Instead, they exhibit structural information by hairpin-loops that form hydrogen bonds between incomplete double strands, and loops free to interact with other molecules. They represent a quasispecies in which many species of RNA may form, such as ribozymes, tRNA-like molecules, and other ncRNAs. RNAs within such a pool can bind amino acids. Ninety different amino acids have been identified on the Murchison meteorite found in Australia, while on Earth only about 20 of them are used for protein synthesis (Meierhenrich, 2008) . Where formation of ribozymes occurred on the early Earth is a matter of speculation. The hydrothermal vents such as black smokers in the deep ocean are possibilities where life may have started (Martin et al., 2008) . There, temperature gradients and clay containing minerals such as magnesium or manganese are available. Pores or niches offer possibilities for concentration of building blocks, which is required for chemical reactions to occur. Interestingly, also ice is a candidate for ribozyme formation and chemical reactions. Ice crystals displace the biomolecules into the liquid phase, which leads to concentration, creating a quasicellular compartmentalization where de novo synthesis of nucleotide precursors is promoted. There, RNA and ribozymes can emerge, which are capable of self-replication (Attwater et al., 2010) .
tRNA-amino acid complexes can find RNAs as "mRNAs." Such interactions could have contributed to the evolution of the genetic code. This sequence of events can lead to primitive ribosome precursors. Ribozymes are the essential catalytic elements in ribosomes: "The ribosome is a ribozyme" (Cech, 2000) , supplemented with about a hundred scaffold proteins later during evolution. The proteins have structural functions and contribute indirectly to enzymatic activity. Are these ribosomebound ribozymes fossils from the early Earth? Small peptides can be formed by ribozymes before ribosomes evolved, whereby single or dimeric amino acids may originate from the universe (Meierhenrich, 2008) .
Small peptides with basic amino acids can increase the catalytic activity of ribozymes as shown in vitro (Müller et al., 1994) . Such proteins are known as RNA-binding proteins from RNA viruses that protect the RNA genome, with motifs such as RAPRKKG of the nucleocapsid NCp7 of HIV (Schmalzbauer et al., 1996) . Peptides can enhance the catalytic activity of ribozymes up to a 100-fold (Müller et al., 1994) . Such peptides of RNA viruses serve as chaperones that remove higher ordered RNA structures, allowing for more efficient interaction of RNA molecules and increasing transcription rates of RNA polymerases (Müller et al., 1994) . Ribonucleoproteins may have also been functionally important during the evolution of ribosomes (Harish and Caetano-Anolles, 2012) .
These pre-ribosomal structures are also similar to precursorlike structures of retroviruses. Reverse transcription can be performed by ribozymes chemically. This action does not necessarily require a protein polymerase such as the reverse transcriptase. Similarly, deoxyribonucleotides can arise by removal of an oxygen without the need of a protein enzyme (a reductase) as today, and allow for DNA polymerization (Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Joyce, 2002) . The same elements of the precursors for ribosomes are also building blocks of retroviruses, which may have a similar evolutionary origin (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . tRNAs serve as primers for the reverse transcriptase, and the sequence of promoters of transposable elements are derived from tRNAs (Lander et al., 2001) . The ribozymes developed into more complex self-cleaving group II introns with insertion of genes encoding a reverse transcriptase and additional proteins (Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) (Figure 1) .
It came as a surprise that the genomes of almost all species are rich in ncDNA, transcribed into ncRNAs but not encoding proteins, as evidenced, for instance, by the "Encyclopedia of DNA Elements" (ENCODE) project. ncDNA amounts to more than 98% of the human DNA genome (Deveson et al., 2017) . Higher organisms tend to have more non-coding information, which allows for more complex modes of gene regulation. The ncRNAs are regulators of the protein-coding sequences. Highly complex organisms such as humans typically have a high number of ncRNA and regulatory mechanisms. ncRNA can range from close to zero in the smallest bacteria such as Pelagibacter ubique to about 98% in the human genome.
RNA viruses such as the retrovirus HIV harbor ncRNAs for gene regulation such as the trans-activating response element (TAR), the binding site for the Tat protein for early viral gene expression. Tat has a highly basic domain comprising mostly Lys and Arg residues, resembling other RNA binding proteins. ncRNA also serves on viral RNA genomes as ribosomal entry sites, primer binding sites or packaging signals. DNA synthesis depends on RNA synthesis as initial event, with RNA primers as starters for DNA replication, inside of cells as FIGURE 1 | A compartment is shown with essential components of life as discussed in the text. Non-coding RNA (ncRNA), ribozymes or viroids, can perform many steps for life without protein-coding genes but only by structural information. Individual amino acids are indicated as black dots and may be available on Earth from the universe. DNA may have existed before retroviruses. The compartment can be interpreted as pre-virus or pre-cell. Viroid, green; RNA, red; DNA, black.
well as during retroviral replication, proving a requirement of RNA (Flint, 2015) .
The number of mammalian protein-coding genes is about 20,000. Surprisingly, this is only a fifth of the number of genes of bread wheat (Appels et al., 2018) . Tulips, maize and other plants also have larger genomes, indicating that the number of genes does not necessarily reflect the complexity of an organism. What makes these plant genomes so large, is still an open question. Could the giant genomes possibly be the result to breeding of plants by farmers or gardeners?
According to Szostak there are molecules which appear like relics from the RNA world such as acetyl-CoA or vitamin B12, both of which are bound to a ribonucleotide for no obvious reason -was it "forgotten" to be removed? (Roberts and Szostak, 1997; Szostak et al., 2001; Szostak, 2011) . Perhaps the connected RNA serves as structural stabilizer. Lipid vesicles could have formed the first compartments and enclosed ribozymes, tRNAs with selected amino acids, and RNA which became mRNA. Is this a pre-cell or pre-virus (Figure 1) ? Patel et al. (2015) demonstrated that the building blocks of life, ribonucleotides, lipids and amino acids, can be formed from C, H, O, P, N, S in a "one pot" synthesis. This study can be regarded as a follow-up study of the classical Urey-Miller in vitro synthesis of biomolecules (Miller, 1953; Miller and Urey, 1959) . Transition from the RNA to the DNA world was promoted by the formation of the reverse transcriptase. The enzyme was first described in retroviruses but it is almost ubiquitous and found in numerous cellular species, many of which with unknown functions (Simon and Zimmerly, 2008; Lescot et al., 2016) . It is an important link between the RNA and the DNA worlds. The name reverse transcriptase is historical and irritating because it is the "real" transcriptase during the transition from the RNA to the DNA world. Similarly, the ribonuclease H (RNase H) is an essential enzyme of retroviruses (Mölling et al., 1971) . The RNase H turned out to be one of the five most frequent and ancient proteins (Ma et al., 2008 ) that belongs to a superfamily of more than sixty different unique representatives and 152 families with numerous functions (Majorek et al., 2014) .
Some of the many tRNAs can become loaded with amino acids. There are viruses containing tRNA-like structures (TLS), resembling these early RNAs (Dreher, 2009) . The TLS of these viruses typically bind to a single amino acid. TLS-viruses include plant viruses, such as Turnip yellow mosaic virus, in Peanut clump virus, Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), and Brome mosaic virus. Only half a tRNA is found in Narnaviruses of fungi. The amino acids known to be components of tRNA-like viruses are valine, histidine and tyrosine. The structures were also designated as "mimicry, " enhancing translation (Dreher, 2009 (Dreher, , 2010 . They look like "frozen" precursor-like elements for protein synthesis. This combination of a partial tRNA linked to one amino acid can be interpreted as an evolutionary early step toward protein synthesis, trapped in a viral element.
Ribozymes are related to the protein-free viroids. Viroids are virus-like elements that belong to the virosphere, the world of viruses (Chela-Flores, 1994) . Viroids lack protein coats and therefore were initially not designated as viruses but virus-like viroids when they were discovered in 1971 by Theodor Diener. He described viroids as "living fossils" (Diener, 2016) (Figure 2) .
From infected potatoes, Diener isolated the Potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd) whose genome was about a 100-fold smaller than those of viruses known at that time. The viroids known today are ranging from 246 to 467 nucleotides. They contain circular single-stranded RNA, are protein-free and self-replicating with no genetic information, but only structural FIGURE 2 | Viroids are hairpin-loop structures and are shown schematically and as electron micrograph. Viroids are, like ribozymes, without genetic information and play major biological roles today in plant diseases, in carnation flowers, in liver cancer, as catalyst of protein synthesis in ribosomes and as circular regulatory RNAs, as "sponges" for other regulatory RNAs.
information in the form of hairpin-loops (Riesner et al., 1979) . They can generate copies of themselves in the appropriate environment. They were designated as the "frontiers of life" (Flores et al., 2014) .
The knowledge of virus composition was based on TMV and its crystallization by Wendell Stanley in 1935 (Pennazio and Roggero, 2000) . The genome of TMV is protein-coding singlestranded RNA of about 6,400 nucleotides that is enclosed by a rod-like protein coat. Viroids, in contrast, do not encode proteins and lack coats but they are closely related to viruses. Viroids can lose their autonomy and rely on host RNA polymerases to replicate, are capable of infecting plants and many are economically important pathogens. There are two families, the nucleus-replicating Pospiviroidae such as PSTVd and the chloroplast-replicating Avsunviroidae like the Avocado sunblotch viroid (ASBVd). Their replication requires host enzymes. Thus, autonomy is replaced by dependence on host enzymes and an intracellular lifestyle.
Most viroids are often enzymatically active ribozymes -yet they are examples that this trait can get lost as a result of changing environmental conditions. Loss of ribozyme activity is a functional, not a genetic loss. Only the nuclear variants, the Pospiviroidae, can lose their ribozyme activity and use the cellular RNase III enzyme for their replication. In contrast, the Avsunviroidae are still active hammerhead ribozymes. Thus, inside the nucleus of a host cell, the enzymatic RNA function can become unnecessary. Not genes, but a function, the catalytic activity, gets lost.
Viroids did apparently not gain genes but cooperated for a more complex lifestyle. For example, Carnation small viroid-like RNA (CarSV RNA) cooperates with a retrovirus and is accompanied by a homologous DNA generated by a reverse transcriptase. This enzyme presumably originates from a pararetrovirus of plants. Pararetroviruses package virus particles at a different stage during replication than retroviruses, the DNA, not the RNA. This unique combination between two viral elements has so far only been detected with CarSV in carnation flowers (Flores et al., 2005 (Flores et al., , 2014 . Why did such a cooperation evolve -perhaps by breeding gardeners? RNA is sensitive to degradation; therefore, genetic increase and growth of the genome may not be favorable energetically -at least not in plants. Gain of function is, in this case, cooperation.
The circular RNA (circRNA) is related to ribozymes/viroids as a chief regulator of other regulatory RNAs, a "sponge" absorbing small RNAs. Micro RNAs (miRNAs) are post-transcriptional regulators that are affected by the presence of circRNAs. circRNAs were detected in human and mouse brains and testes as well as in plants. They can bind 70 conserved miRNAs in a cell and amount up to 25,000 molecules (Hansen et al., 2013) . Their structure is reminiscent of catalytically active ribozymes.
There is an exceptional viroid that gained coding information and entered the human liver (Taylor, 2009) . The viroid is known as hepatitis delta virus (HDV). It has the smallest genome of any known animal virus of about 1,680 nucleotides. It has properties typical of viroids, since it contains circRNA, forms similar hairpin-loops and replicates in the nucleus using host enzymes. Two polymerases have to redirect their specificity from DNA to RNA to generate the HDV genome and antigenome. Both of them have ribozyme activity. In contrast to other ribozymes, HDV encodes a protein, the hepatitis delta antigen (HDVAg) that occurs in two forms, the small-HDVAg (24 kDa) supporting replication and the large-HDVAg (27 kDa) that helps virion assembly. The gene was presumably picked up from the host cell by recombination of HDV's mRNA intermediate with a host mRNA. Transmission depends on a helper virus, the Hepatitis B virus (HBV), which delivers the coat (Taylor, 2009 ) Does packaging by a helper virus protect the genome and thereby allow for a larger viroid to exist?
In plants, viroids may not be able to become bigger possibly due to their sensitivity to degradation -but they cannot become much smaller either. Only a single viroid is known that is completely composed of protein-coding RNA with triplets (AbouHaidar et al., 2014). Viroids and related replicating RNAs are error-prone replicating units and the error frequency imposes a certain minimal size onto them, as they would otherwise become extinct. This mechanism has been described as "error catastrophe, " which prevents survival (Eigen, 1971 (Eigen, , 2013 . The viroids and related RNAs are the smallest known replicons. Smaller ones would become extinct in the absence of repair systems.
In summary, RNA can catalyze many reactions. Protein enzymes which may have evolved later have higher catalytic activities. Ribozymes are carriers of information, but do not require coding genes. Information is stored in their sequence and structure. Thus, replication of an initial RNA is followed by flow of information, from DNA to RNA to protein, as described the Central Dogma (Crick, 1968) . Even an information flow from protein to DNA has been described for some archaeal proteins (Béguin et al., 2015) . The DNA-protein world contains numerous ncRNAs with key functions. ncRNA may serve as a model compound for the origin of life on other planets. Hereby not the chemical composition of this molecule is of prime relevance, but its simplicity and multifunctionality. Furthermore, RNA is software and hardware in a single molecule, which makes it unique in our world. There are other scenarios besides the here discussed "virus-first, " such as "protein-first", "metabolism-fist" or the "lipid world" (Segré et al., 2001; Andras and Andras, 2005; Vasas et al., 2010; Moelling, 2012) . Some of these alternative concepts were built on phylogenomics, the reconstruction of the tree of life by genome sequencing (Delsuc et al., 2005) . Surprisingly, it was Sir Francis Crick, one of the discoverers of the DNA double-helix, who stated that he would not be surprised about a world completely built of RNA. A similar prediction was made by Walter Gilbert (Crick, 1968; Gilbert, 1986) . What a vision! Our world was almost 50 years later defined as "RNAprotein" world (Altman, 2013) . One can speculate our world was built of ribozymes or viroids, which means "viruses first."
ncRNAs appear as relics from the past RNA world, before DNA, the genetic code and proteins evolved. However, ncRNA is essential in our biological DNA world today. It is possible to produce such ncRNA today in the test tube by loss of genic information from protein-coding RNA. This reduction to ncRNA was demonstrated in vitro with phage RNA. Phage Qβ genomic RNA, 4,217 nucleotides in length, was incubated in the presence of Qβ replicase, free nucleotides and salts, a rich milieu in the test tube. The RNA was allowed to replicate by means of the Qβ replicase. Serial transfer of aliquots to fresh medium led to ever faster replication rates and reduction of genomic size, down to 218 nucleotides of ncRNA in 74 generations. This study demonstrated that, depending on environmental conditions, an extreme gene reduction can take place. This experiment performed in 1965 was designated as "Spiegelman's Monster." Coding RNA became replicating ncRNA (Spiegelman et al., 1965; Kacian et al., 1972) ! Manfred Eigen extended this experiment and demonstrated further that a mixture containing no RNA to start with but only ribonucleotides and the Qβ replicase can under the right conditions in a test tube spontaneously generate self-replicating ncRNA. This evolved into a form similar to Spiegelman's Monster. The presence of the replicase enzyme was still necessary in these studies. Furthermore, a change in enzyme concentration and addition of short RNAs or an RNA intercalator influenced the arising RNA population (Sumper and Luce, 1975; Eigen, 2013) . Thus, the complexity of genomes depends on the environment: poor conditions lead to increased complexity and rich environments to reduced complexity.
The process demonstrated in this experiment with viral components indicates that reversion to simplicity, reduction in size, loss of genetic information and speed in replication can be major forces of life, even though this appears to be like a reversion of evolution. The experiment can perhaps be generalized from the test tube to a principle, that the most successful survivors on our planet are the viruses and microorganisms, which became the most abundant entities. Perhaps life can start from there again.
These studies raise the question of how RNA molecules can become longer, if the small polymers become smaller and smaller, replicate faster and outcompete longer ones. This may be overcome by heat flow across an open pore in submerged rocks, which concentrates replicating oligonucleotides from a constant feeding flow and selection for longer strands. This has been described for an increase from 100 to 1,000 nucleotides in vitro. RNA molecules shorter than 75 nucleotides will die out (Kreysing et al., 2015) . Could a poor environment lead to an increase of complexity? This could be tested. Ribozymes were shown to grow in size by uptake of genes, as demonstrated for HDV (Taylor, 2009 ).
An interesting recent unexpected example supporting the notion that environmental conditions influence genetic complexity, is the human gut microbiome. Its complexity increases with diverse food, while uniform rich food reduces its diversity and may lead to diseases such as obesity. Colonization of the human intestinal tract starts at birth. A few dozen bacterial and viral/phage species are conserved between individuals (core sequences) as a stable composition (Broecker et al., 2016c . Dysbiosis has been observed in several chronic diseases and in obesity, a loss of bacterial richness and diversity. Nutrition under affluent conditions with sugar-rich food contributes to obesity, which results in a significant reduction of the complexity of the microbiome. This reduction is difficult to revert (Cotillard et al., 2013; Le Chatelier et al., 2013) . The gut microbiome in human patients with obesity is reminiscent of the gene reduction described in the Spiegelman's Monster experiment: reduction of genes in a rich environment.
The reduction of the complexity of the microbiome is in part attributed to the action of phages, which under such conditions, defined as stress, lyse the bacteria. Fecal microbiota transplantation can even be replaced by soluble fractions containing phages or metabolites from the donor without bacteria (Ott et al., 2017) . Analogously, the most highly complex microbiomes are found in indigenous human tribes in Africa, which live on a broad variety of different nutrients. It is a slow process, though, to increase gut microbiota complexity by diverse nutrition. The obesity-associated microbiota that survive are fitter and more difficult to counteract. Urbanization and westernization of the diet is associated with a loss of microbial biodiversity, loss of microbial organisms and genes (Segata, 2015) .
To understand the mechanism and driving force for genome reduction, deletion rates were tested by insertion of an indicator gene into the Salmonella enterica genome. The loss of the indicator gene was monitored by serial passage in rich medium. After 1,000 generations about 25% of the deletions caused increased bacterial fitness. Deletions resulted in smaller genomes with reduced or absence of DNA repair genes (Koskiniemi et al., 2012) . Gene loss conferred a higher fitness to the bacteria under these experimental conditions.
The recently discovered mimiviruses and other giant viruses are worth considering for understanding the evolution of life with respect to the contribution of viruses. Their hosts are, for example, Acanthamoeba, Chlorella, and Coccolithus algae (Emiliania huxleyi), but also corals or sponges as discussed more recently. Mimiviruses were first discovered in cooling water towers in Bradford, United Kingdom in 2003 with about 1,000 genes, most of which unrelated to previously known genes. Mimiviruses have received attention because they contain elements that were considered hallmarks of living cells, not of viruses, such as elements required for protein synthesis, tRNAs and amino acid transferases. The mimiviruses harbor these building blocks as incomplete sets not sufficient for independent protein synthesis as bacteria or archaea can perform, preventing them from leading an autonomous life (La Scola et al., 2003 Scola et al., , 2008 . They are larger than some bacteria. Giant viruses can be looked at as being on an evolutionary path toward a cellular organism. Alternatively, they may have evolved from a cellular organism by loss of genetic information (Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015) . Giant viruses have frequently taken up genes from their hosts by horizontal gene transfer (HGT) (La Scola et al., 2008; Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015; Colson et al., 2018) . A graph on genome sizes shows that mimiviruses and bacteria overlap in size, indicating a continuous transition between viruses and bacteria and between living and non-living worlds (based on Holmes, 2011) (Figure 3) . Other giant viruses, such as megaviruses, were discovered in the ocean of Chile with 1,120 genes. Most recently the Klosneuvirus was identified in the sewage of the monastery Klosterneuburg in Austria in 2017 with 1.57 million (mio) basepairs (Mitch, 2017) . Pithovirus sibericum is the largest among giant viruses discovered to date with a diameter of 1.5 microns, a genome of 470,000 bp with 467 putative genes, 1.6 microns in length, and it is presumably 30,000 years old as it was recovered from permafrost in Siberia (Legendre et al., 2014) . The smaller Pandoraviruses with 1 micron in length have five times larger genomes, 2,500,000 bp (Philippe et al., 2013) (Figure 3) .
The giant viruses can even be hosts to smaller viruses, the virophages, reminiscent of bacteriophages, the viruses of bacteria. These virophages such as Sputnik are only 50 nm in size with 18,343 bp of circular dsDNA and 21 predicted proteincoding genes. They replicate in viral factories and consume the resources of the mimivirus, thereby destroying it. Some, virophages can even integrate into the genome of the cellular host and can be reactivated when the host is infected by giant viruses. Thus, giant viruses suggest that viruses are close to living entities or may have been alive (La Scola et al., 2008; Fischer and Hackl, 2016) . In biology it is common to distinguish between living and dead matter by the ability to synthesize proteins and replicate autonomously. The giant viruses may be considered as missing link between the two, because they harbor "almost" the protein synthesis apparatus. The transition from living to the non-living world is continuous, not separated by a sharp borderline (Figure 3) .
Viruses are not considered alive by most of the scientific community and as written in textbooks, because they cannot replicate autonomously. Yet some of the giant viruses are equipped with almost all components of the protein synthesis machinery close to bacteria suggesting that they belong to the living matter (Schulz et al., 2017) . The ribozymes may have been the earliest replicating entity. Perhaps also other viruses were initially more independent of the early Earth than they are today. As described in Figure 1 there may have been initially no major difference between an early virus or an early cell. Only later viruses may have given up their autonomous replication and became parasites -as has been described for some bacteria (see below).
Efforts have been made to identify the smallest living cell that is still autonomously replicating. Among the presumably smallest naturally occurring bacteria is Pelagibacter ubique of the SAR11 clade of bacteria (Giovannoni, 2017) , which was discovered in 1990. It is an alpha-proteobacterium with 1,389 genes present ubiquitously in all oceans. It can reach up to 10 28 free living cells in total and represents about 25% of microbial plankton cells. Very little of its DNA is non-coding. It harbors podophage-type phages, designated as "pelagiphage" (Zhao et al., 2013) . This small bacterium was designated as the most common organism on the planet. Why is it so successful? This autonomous bacterium is smaller than some parasitic giant viruses. Craig Venter, who first succeeded in sequencing the human genome, tried to minimize the putative smallest genome of a living species, from Mycoplasma mycoides, a parasitic bacterium that lives in ruminants (Gibson et al., 2008 (Gibson et al., , 2010 . His group synthesized a genome of 531,000 bp with 473 genes, 149 of them (32%) with unknown functions (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Among the smallest parasitic living organisms is Nanoarchaeum equitans. It is a thermophile archaeon which lives at 80 • C and at pH 6 with 2% salt (Huber et al., 2003) . Its genome has a size of 490,000 bp and encodes 540 genes. N. equitans is an obligate symbiont of a bigger archaeon, Ignicoccus riding on it as on a horse, hence the name (Huber et al., 2003) .
The world of viruses covers a range of three logs in size of their genomes: from zero genes to about 2,500 genes amounting to about 2,500,000 bp of DNA. The zero-gene viroids are about 300 bases in length (Figure 3) .
The virosphere is the most successful reservoir of biological entities on our planet in terms of numbers of particles, speed of replication, growth rates, and sequence space. There are about 10 33 viruses on our planet and they are present in every single existing species (Suttle, 2005) .
There is no living species without viruses! Viruses also occur freely in the oceans, in the soil, in clouds up to the stratosphere and higher, to at least 300 km in altitude. They populate the human intestine, birth canal, and the outside of the body as protective layer against microbial populations. Microbes contain phages that are activated during stress conditions such as lack of nutrients, change in temperatures, lack of space and other changes of environmental conditions.
One of the most earth-shaking papers of this century was the publication of the human genome sequence (Lander et al., 2001) . About half, possibly even two-thirds of the sequence are composed of more or less complete endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) and related retroelements (REs) (de Koning et al., 2011) . REs amplify via copy-and-paste mechanisms involving a reverse transcriptase step from an RNA intermediate into DNA. In addition, DNA transposable elements (TEs) move by a cutand-paste mechanism. The origin of REs is being discussed as remnants of ancient retroviral germline infections that became evolutionarily fixed in the genome. About 450,000 human ERV (HERV) elements constitute about 8% of the human genome consisting of hallmark retroviral elements like the gag, pol, env genes and flanking long terminal repeats (LTR) that act as promoters (Lander et al., 2001) . Howard Temin, one of the discoverers of the reverse transcriptase, in 1985 already described endogenous retrovirus-like elements, which he estimated to about 10% of the human and mouse genome sequence (Temin, 1985) . The actual number is about 45% as estimated today (Lander et al., 2001) . In some genes such as the Protein Kinase Inhibitor B (PKIB) gene we determined about 70% retrovirusrelated sequences (Moelling and Broecker, 2015) . Is there a limit? Could it have been 100%? Retroviruses are estimated to have entered the lineage of the mammalian genome 550 million years ago (MYA) (Hayward, 2017) . Older ERV sequences may exist but are unrecognizable today due to the accumulation of mutations.
ERVs undergo mutations, deletions or homologous recombination events with large deletions and can become as short as solo LTR elements, which are a few hundred bp in length -the left-overs from full-length retroviral genomes of about 10,000 bp. The LTR promoters can deregulate neighboring genes. Homologous recombination events may be considered as gene loss or gene reduction events. It is the assumption that the ERVs, which were no longer needed for host cell defense, were no longer selected for by evolution and consequently deleted as unnecessary consumers of energy.
Eugene Koonin points out that infection and integration are unique events occurring at a fast pace, while loss and gene reduction may take much longer time frames (Wolf and Koonin, 2013) .
A frequent gene reduction of eukaryotic genomes is the loss of the viral envelope protein encoded by the env gene. Without a coat, retroviruses can no longer leave the cell and infect other cells. They lose mobility and become obligatory intracellular elements. Helper viruses can supply envelope proteins in trans and mobilize the viruses. TEs or REs can be regarded as examples of coat-free intracellular virus relics -or could it have been the other way round, perhaps precursors of full-length retroviruses?
These elements can be amplified intracellularly and modify the host genomes by integration with the potential danger of gene disruption and genetic changes. REs can lead to gene duplications and pseudogene development, with one copy for stable conservation of acquired functions and the other one for innovations (Cotton and Page, 2005) . Such duplications constitute large amounts of mammalian genomes (Zhang, 2003) . Retroviruses have an RNase H moiety duplication, one of which serves as a catalytically inactive linker between the RT polymerase and the enzymatically active RNase H (Xiong and Eickbush, 1990; Malik and Eickbush, 2001; Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) . This gene duplication dates back to 500 mio years (Cotton and Page, 2005) .
Gene duplications are a common cause of cancer, which often occurs only in the genome of the cancer cell itself, less affecting offsprings. Myc, Myb, ErbB2, Ras, and Raf are oncogenes amplified in diverse types of human cancers (Vogelstein and Kinzler, 2002) . The ability of retroviruses to integrate makes them distinct from endosymbionts which stay separate. Yet the net result is very similar, acquisition of new genetic information, which is transmitted to the next generation, if the germline is infected and endogenization of the virus occurred.
Viral integration is not limited to eukaryotic cells but also a mechanism in prokaryotes for maintenance of the lysogenic state of phages inside bacteria.
Also, for other eukaryotic viruses such as HBV, the envelope surface antigen BHsAg can be deleted, which leads to an obligatory intracellular life style for the virus, which especially in the presence of HCV promotes cancer (Yang et al., 2016) .
HIV has been shown to rapidly lose one of its auxiliary genes, nef, originally for negative factor. The gene was lost within a rather low number of passages of the virus grown under tissue culture conditions by selection for high virus titer producing cells. Deletion of nef resulted in a significant increase of the virus titer in culture -hence the name. The nef gene product was of no need inside tissue culture cells, rather it was inhibitory for replication. However, it is essential for pathogenicity in animals, and subsequently nef was reinterpreted as "necessary factor" (Flint, 2015) .
Also, the human hosts of HIV can lose a significant terminal portion of a seven transmembrane receptor in lymphocytes, the primary target cell for HIV entry and for virus uptake. This molecule, the CCR5 cytokine receptor is truncated by 32 carboxy-terminal amino acids (CCR5-32), disabling the receptor functionally. The allele frequency of the mutant CCR5-32 mutant is about 10% in the European population, making these people resistant to HIV infections (Solloch et al., 2017) . This gene loss in Europeans has been shown to make the individuals resistant not only against HIV infection but also against malaria. This may have been the selective pressure in the past before HIV/AIDS arose. No side effect for humans lacking this gene has been described (Galvani and Slatkin, 2003) .
Viruses have been proven to be drivers of evolution (Villarreal and Witzany, 2010) , including the human genome, which by at least 45% is composed of sequences related to retroviruses. In addition, endogenized retroviruses supplied the syncytin genes that are essential for the development of the mammalian placenta, and allowed the growth of embryos without its rejection by the maternal immune system (Dupressoir et al., 2012) . Thus, the same property which causes immunodeficiency in HIV-infected patients and leads to AIDS causes syncytia formation, cell fusion after infection by a retrovirus. Viruses have also been proposed to be at the origin of the evolution of adaptive immunity (Villarreal, 2009 ). Thus, viruses shaped genomes by supplying essential genes and mechanisms.
Endogenization of retroviruses has occurred in the mammalian genomes for at least 550 mio years (Hayward, 2017) . If the integrated ERVs did not provide any selective advantage, they deteriorated and accumulated mutations with loss of function. This was directly proven by reconstruction of an infectious retrovirus from the consensus sequence of 9 defective endogenous virus sequences, designated as Phoenix. The virus was expressed from a constructed synthetic DNA clone in cell culture and formed virus particles identified by high resolution microscopic analysis (Dewannieux and Heidmann, 2013) .
The koalas in Australia are currently undergoing endogenization of a retrovirus (koala retrovirus, KoRV) in "real time" and demonstrate possible consequences for immunity. In the early 1900s, some individuals were transferred to islands, including Kangaroo Island, close to the Australian mainland for repopulation purposes, as koalas were threatened to become extinct. Today, the majority of the koala population is infected by KoRV, which is closely related to the Gibbon ape leukemia virus (GALV). Yet, koalas isolated on Kangaroo Island are KoRV negative, which allows dating the introduction of KoRV into the koala population to about one hundred years ago. Many of the infected koalas fell ill and died, yet some populations became resistant within about 100 years, corresponding to about 10 generations. The koalas likely developed resistance due to the integrated DNA proviruses. The retrovirus is transmitted as exogenous as well as endogenous virus, similar to the Jaagsiekte sheep retrovirus (JSRV), whereby the endogenized viruses protect with a viral gene product, such as Env, against de novo infections by "superinfection exclusion" (Tarlinton, 2012) . The contribution of retroviruses to the antiviral defense is striking, since all retroviral genes have analogous genes in the siRNA/RNAi defense mechanism of eukaryotic cells (Moelling et al., 2006) .
Retroviruses can protect against infection by other related viruses, for example, by expressing Env proteins that block cellsurface receptors (Villarreal, 2011) . A comparable mechanism protects bacterial cells against DNA phages, by integrated phage DNA fragments that are transcribed into mRNA and hybridize to incoming new DNA phages and thereby lead to their destruction by hybrid-specific nucleases, CRISPR/Cas immunity (Charpentier and Doudna, 2013) . It is often not realized that immunity acquisition in bacteria and mammalian cells follow analogous mechanisms (Figure 4) .
Integration of retroviruses normally occurs in somatic cells after infection as an obligatory step during the viral life cycle. Infection of germline cells can lead to transmission to the next generation and ultimately result in inherited resistance. Endogenized retroviruses likely caused resistance FIGURE 4 | Viruses protect against viruses: retroviruses protect a cell against a new infection by a similar virus designated as "superinfection exclusion" or viral interference. This is mediated by viral gene products such as proteins or nucleic acids. Similarly, phages protect against phages: superinfection of bacteria is prevented by CRISPR/Cas RNA originating from previous infections. The mechanisms of defense against viruses and phages are analogous. Protection by viruses or phages against superinfections represents cellular defense and acquired immunity. The four examples are discussed in the text.
to the exogenous counterparts. Similarly, resistance to Simian Immune Deficiency virus (SIV) in some monkey species may be explained by endogenization (Li et al., 2017 (Li et al., , 2018 . In the case of phages and their prokaryotic hosts the mechanism is described as CRISPR/Cas, which follow analogous principles of "endogenization" of incoming genetic material for subsequent exclusion.
One may speculate that HIV may also eventually become endogenized into the human genome. There is some evidence that HIV can infect human germline cells and can be transmitted to the embryonic genome (Wang et al., 2011) . How long this may take is not known -10 generations?
The loss of function of ERVs can occur by mutations, deletions of the env or other genes and ultimately all coding genes by homologous recombination, leaving behind only one LTR. The number of retrovirus-like elements add up to about 450,000, corresponding to 8% of the human genome (Lander et al., 2001; Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). The promoter regions were analyzed for their contribution to cancer by activating neighboring genes -as a consequence of a former retrovirus infection. Indeed, activated cellular genes by "downstream promotion" were identified in animal studies with activation of the myc gene as one of many examples, leading to chronic, not acute development of cancer (Ott et al., 2013) . As a general mechanism for human cancer today the LTRs are, however, not identified as a major culprit. Most of the ERVs we find today have been integrated during evolution in introns or other regions where their presence is relatively harmless. Did the other ones result in death of the carriers which disappeared? The effects of LTRs on the expression levels of neighboring host genes was studied with the endogenous human virus, HERV-K, as a possible cause of cancer, but this appears not to be a general phenomenon (Broecker et al., 2016b) . As shown for the koalas, ERVs can confer immunity to viral infections (Feschotte and Gilbert, 2012) .
A related ERV, HERV-H, was shown to produce an RNA that keeps early embryonic cells pluripotent and even revert adult cells to regain pluripotency (Grow et al., 2015) . Thus, the role of ERVs may be more complex than we presently know.
Transposable elements and REs that lost the ability of cellular transmission by deletion of the coat protein majorly contribute to genetic complexity of host cells. They are "locked" inside the cells and are major drivers of the increase of genetic complexity (Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). One could speculate that these intracellular elements are replicationincompetent retroviruses lacking coats (Lander et al., 2001) . Bats transmit viruses such as Ebola and SARS coronavirus without suffering from disease (Beltz, 2018) . Even RNA viruses such as Bornaviruses have been shown to integrate by illegitimate reverse transcription, possibly also supplying immunity against superinfection (Katzourakis and Gifford, 2010) .
There are two prominent events that significantly contributed to the success of life and the formation of cells. Both of them are associated with gene reduction. This phenomenon may play a role for the evolution of viruses from autonomous to parasitic lifestyles. In the 1960s Lynn Margulis proposed an extracellular origin for mitochondria (Margulis, 1970 (Margulis, , 1993 ). An ancestral cell, perhaps an archaeon, was infected by an anaerobic bacterium, which gave rise to mitochondria. Similarly, cyanobacteria formed the chloroplasts in modern plant cells. Mitochondria arose around 1.45 billion years ago (BYA) (Embley and Martin, 2006) . Mitochondria and chloroplasts are the most striking examples for a change in lifestyle from autonomous bacteria to endosymbionts. This transition is often considered as extremely rare and a hallmark of evolution of life on our planet. However, there are many other obligate intracellular parasites such as Rickettsia, Chlamydia trachomatis, Coxiella burnetii (the causative agent of Q fever), Mycobacterium leprae, M. tuberculosis, and M. mycoides (Beare et al., 2006) .
The change of lifestyle of the endosymbionts in the two cases of mitochondria and chloroplasts is striking. Both of them drastically reduced their genetic make-up. Mitochondria contain less than 37 genes, left from the original about 3,000 genes. Is endogenization of retroviruses, the ERVs, which are integrated into germline cells, related to endosymbiosis? Are these endosymbionts models for the transition from autonomous lifestyle to a parasitic life-which may have taken place with viruses? A more recent typical example for a reductive evolution are Rickettsia. These bacteria were assumed for some time to be viruses because of their obligatory intracellular parasitic existence. Rickettsia have evolved from autonomously replicating bacteria. Reductive evolution of endosymbionts can yield bacteria with tiny genomes on the expense of autonomous extracellular life. Their genomes are 1.11 mio bp in length with about 834 protein-coding genes, and loss of 24% by reductive evolution (Ogata et al., 2001) . Rickettsia may have some relationship with cyanobacteria, which are considered as the major symbionts.
Can one speculate that viruses may have been autonomous entities initially? Viroids may have undergone transition from autonomy to parasites, just as shown for mitochondria, chloroplasts or Rickettsia? To which extent have viruses been autonomous and independent of cellular metabolisms originally -and contributed to the origin of cells? Could they only later have lost their autonomy and become parasitic?
Viruses are minimalistic in their composition and must have undergone stringent gene reductions (Flint, 2015) . How small can their genomes become? Most coding RNA viruses still contain regulatory elements, ncRNA at the 3 and 5 terminal regions for ribosomal entry, protein synthesis, transcriptional regulation, and others.
A subgroup of retroviruses is an interesting example in respect to simultaneous loss and gain of genetic information. The oncogenic retroviruses or tumorviruses can recombine with cellular genes which under the promoters of retroviruses can become oncogenes and drivers of cancer. About a hundred oncogenes have been selected for in the laboratories and studied over decades for understanding the molecular mechanisms of cancer. Selection for growth advantages of the host cells led to the discovery of the fastest growth-promoting oncogenes we know today, such as Ras, Raf, ErbB or Myc, which are in part successful targets for anticancer drugs (Moelling et al., 1984) .
These oncogenes were in most cases taken up by the retroviruses at the expense of structural (gag), replicating (pol) or envelope (env) genes, and are often expressed as fusion proteins with Gag. Thus, oncogenic retroviruses are obligatory intracellular defective viruses and were selected for in the laboratory by researchers for the oncogenes with the most potent growth promoting ability. They need the supply of replicatory genes in trans from co-infecting helper viruses to infect other cells (Flint, 2015) . Retroviruses are able to pick up cellular genes, transfer and integrate them into neighboring cells. Some strains of Rous sarcoma virus maintain replication competent when carrying the cell-derived src (for sarcoma) oncogene encoding a protein of 536 amino acids that apparently can fit into the retroviral particle along with the full-size viral genome (Broecker et al., 2016a) . Spatial reasons may have influenced the formation of oncogenic retroviruses and limited their size and thereby led to their defective phenotypes.
There are indications that the uncontrolled activity of (retro)transposons in germline cells can result in diseases such as male infertility -presumably by "error catastrophe, " caused by too many transposition events. In mammals, piRNAs tame transposon activity by means of the RNase H activity of PIWI proteins during spermatogenesis (Girard et al., 2006) .
Only a minority of viruses are pathogens; most of them do not cause diseases. On the contrary, they are most important as drivers of evolution, as transmitters of genetic material, as innovative agents. In particular, the RNA viruses are the most innovative ones. Some of them are pathogenic and dangerous, such as HIV or influenza virus, or viroids in plants. RNA viruses are able to change so rapidly that the host immune system is unable to counteract the infection. Pathogenicity arises when environmental conditions change, for instance, when a virus enters a new organism or species.
Increase of cellular complexity by viruses is an important feature of evolution. Such major evolutionary changes are recently taken as arguments against the evolutionary theory by Charles Darwin who considered gradual changes, small increments by mutations as the main basis for selection and evolution. New criticism is addressing this thinking, considering larger changes as evolutionary drivers. Such changes arise by many complex phenomena such as endosymbiosis, infection by prokaryotes, viruses and fungi, recombination of genes, HGT, infections, sex. Dramatic changes such as endosymbiosis or pathogen infections extend Darwin's concept of evolution.
There are numerous examples for the contribution of viruses to the evolution of life since at least as long as 550 MYA (Hayward, 2017) . But genetic noise through random mutations does not allow us to go back to the origin of life. It may not be impossible that the earliest compartment was indistinguishable, either a pre-cell or a pre-virus. By analogy one may speculate that at some point autonomous viruses gave up independence for an obligatory intracellular life -as has been described for mitochondria and chloroplasts but also intracellular bacteria such as Rickettsia. This speculation is based on the concept that early life must have started simple and with high genetic variability and then became more complex. But complexity can be given up for a less energy consuming lifestyle with small genomes and high speed of replication (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . Therefore, the question may be repeated: "Are viruses our oldest ancestors?" Some fossil life can be partially reproduced in vitro by Spiegelman's Monster and Eigen's follow-up experiments, explaining the great surviving potential of simple ncRNA.
Viruses can be pathogens, but their recognition as primarily causing diseases is wrong. This notion is based on the history of viruses in medicine, as explained in a book entitled "Viruses: More Friends Than Foes" (Moelling, 2017) . The scenario described here focuses on viruses as drivers of evolution.
The early RNA world gained interest 20-30 years ago as evidenced by the references provided above. Surprisingly, there are scientists who still believe in the "pansperm hypothesis" and think that retroviruses are of extraterrestric origin (Steele et al., 2018) . The recent interest in the origin of life arose from the newly discovered exoplanets whose number increases daily -and which may be as numerous as 10 25 . Thus, pure statistics make some people believe that there is extraterrestrial life.
The extraterrestric life is mimicked in laboratories on Earth with many assumptions -perhaps this overview stimulates some thinking. The discussion presented here should be taken as concept about simple replicating and evolving entities possibly arising from different building blocks in other environments, with structure being more relevant than sequence. | Does RNA replication need polymerase enzymes? | 1,182 | Replication of RNA molecules can be performed chemically from RNA without polymerase enzymes. | 3,512 |
1,690 | Viruses and Evolution – Viruses First? A Personal Perspective
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433886/
SHA: f3b9fc0f8e0a431366196d3e835e1ec368b379d1
Authors: Moelling, Karin; Broecker, Felix
Date: 2019-03-19
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00523
License: cc-by
Abstract: The discovery of exoplanets within putative habitable zones revolutionized astrobiology in recent years. It stimulated interest in the question about the origin of life and its evolution. Here, we discuss what the roles of viruses might have been at the beginning of life and during evolution. Viruses are the most abundant biological entities on Earth. They are present everywhere, in our surrounding, the oceans, the soil and in every living being. Retroviruses contributed to about half of our genomic sequences and to the evolution of the mammalian placenta. Contemporary viruses reflect evolution ranging from the RNA world to the DNA-protein world. How far back can we trace their contribution? Earliest replicating and evolving entities are the ribozymes or viroids fulfilling several criteria of life. RNA can perform many aspects of life and influences our gene expression until today. The simplest structures with non-protein-coding information may represent models of life built on structural, not genetic information. Viruses today are obligatory parasites depending on host cells. Examples of how an independent lifestyle might have been lost include mitochondria, chloroplasts, Rickettsia and others, which used to be autonomous bacteria and became intracellular parasites or endosymbionts, thereby losing most of their genes. Even in vitro the loss of genes can be recapitulated all the way from coding to non-coding RNA. Furthermore, the giant viruses may indicate that there is no sharp border between living and non-living entities but an evolutionary continuum. Here, it is discussed how viruses can lose and gain genes, and that they are essential drivers of evolution. This discussion may stimulate the thinking about viruses as early possible forms of life. Apart from our view “viruses first”, there are others such as “proteins first” and “metabolism first.”
Text: Mycoplasma mycoides by systematic deletion of individual genes resulted in a synthetic minimal genome of 473 genes (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Can one consider simpler living entities?
There are elements with zero genes that fulfill many criteria for early life: ribozymes, catalytic RNAs closely related to viroids. They were recovered in vitro from 10 15 molecules (aptamers), 220 nucleotides in length, by 10 rounds of selection. Among the many RNA species present in this collection of quasispecies RNAs were catalytically active members, enzymatically active ribozymes. The sequence space for 220-mer RNAs is about 3 × 10 132 (Eigen, 1971; Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Brackett and Dieckmann, 2006) .
The selected ribozymes were able to replicate, cleave, join, and form peptide bonds. They can polymerize progeny chemically, allow for mutations to occur and can evolve. One molecule serves as catalyst, the other one as substrate. Replication of ribozymes was demonstrated in the test tube (Lincoln and Joyce, 2009) . Ribozymes can form peptide bonds between amino acids (Zhang and Cech, 1997) . Thus, small peptides were available by ribozyme activity. Consequently, an RNA modification has been proposed as peptide nucleic acid (PNA), with more stable peptide bonds instead of phosphodiester bonds (Zhang and Cech, 1997; Joyce, 2002) . Replication of RNA molecules can be performed chemically from RNA without polymerase enzymes. In addition, deoxyribozymes can form from ribonucleotides (Wilson and Szostak, 1999) . Thus, DNA can arise from RNA chemically, without the key protein enzyme, the reverse transcriptase.
An entire living world is possible from non-coding RNA (ncRNA) before evolution of the genetic code and protein enzymes. Ribozymes naturally consist of circular single-stranded RNAs (Orgel, 2004) . They lack the genetic triplet code and do not encode proteins. Instead, they exhibit structural information by hairpin-loops that form hydrogen bonds between incomplete double strands, and loops free to interact with other molecules. They represent a quasispecies in which many species of RNA may form, such as ribozymes, tRNA-like molecules, and other ncRNAs. RNAs within such a pool can bind amino acids. Ninety different amino acids have been identified on the Murchison meteorite found in Australia, while on Earth only about 20 of them are used for protein synthesis (Meierhenrich, 2008) . Where formation of ribozymes occurred on the early Earth is a matter of speculation. The hydrothermal vents such as black smokers in the deep ocean are possibilities where life may have started (Martin et al., 2008) . There, temperature gradients and clay containing minerals such as magnesium or manganese are available. Pores or niches offer possibilities for concentration of building blocks, which is required for chemical reactions to occur. Interestingly, also ice is a candidate for ribozyme formation and chemical reactions. Ice crystals displace the biomolecules into the liquid phase, which leads to concentration, creating a quasicellular compartmentalization where de novo synthesis of nucleotide precursors is promoted. There, RNA and ribozymes can emerge, which are capable of self-replication (Attwater et al., 2010) .
tRNA-amino acid complexes can find RNAs as "mRNAs." Such interactions could have contributed to the evolution of the genetic code. This sequence of events can lead to primitive ribosome precursors. Ribozymes are the essential catalytic elements in ribosomes: "The ribosome is a ribozyme" (Cech, 2000) , supplemented with about a hundred scaffold proteins later during evolution. The proteins have structural functions and contribute indirectly to enzymatic activity. Are these ribosomebound ribozymes fossils from the early Earth? Small peptides can be formed by ribozymes before ribosomes evolved, whereby single or dimeric amino acids may originate from the universe (Meierhenrich, 2008) .
Small peptides with basic amino acids can increase the catalytic activity of ribozymes as shown in vitro (Müller et al., 1994) . Such proteins are known as RNA-binding proteins from RNA viruses that protect the RNA genome, with motifs such as RAPRKKG of the nucleocapsid NCp7 of HIV (Schmalzbauer et al., 1996) . Peptides can enhance the catalytic activity of ribozymes up to a 100-fold (Müller et al., 1994) . Such peptides of RNA viruses serve as chaperones that remove higher ordered RNA structures, allowing for more efficient interaction of RNA molecules and increasing transcription rates of RNA polymerases (Müller et al., 1994) . Ribonucleoproteins may have also been functionally important during the evolution of ribosomes (Harish and Caetano-Anolles, 2012) .
These pre-ribosomal structures are also similar to precursorlike structures of retroviruses. Reverse transcription can be performed by ribozymes chemically. This action does not necessarily require a protein polymerase such as the reverse transcriptase. Similarly, deoxyribonucleotides can arise by removal of an oxygen without the need of a protein enzyme (a reductase) as today, and allow for DNA polymerization (Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Joyce, 2002) . The same elements of the precursors for ribosomes are also building blocks of retroviruses, which may have a similar evolutionary origin (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . tRNAs serve as primers for the reverse transcriptase, and the sequence of promoters of transposable elements are derived from tRNAs (Lander et al., 2001) . The ribozymes developed into more complex self-cleaving group II introns with insertion of genes encoding a reverse transcriptase and additional proteins (Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) (Figure 1) .
It came as a surprise that the genomes of almost all species are rich in ncDNA, transcribed into ncRNAs but not encoding proteins, as evidenced, for instance, by the "Encyclopedia of DNA Elements" (ENCODE) project. ncDNA amounts to more than 98% of the human DNA genome (Deveson et al., 2017) . Higher organisms tend to have more non-coding information, which allows for more complex modes of gene regulation. The ncRNAs are regulators of the protein-coding sequences. Highly complex organisms such as humans typically have a high number of ncRNA and regulatory mechanisms. ncRNA can range from close to zero in the smallest bacteria such as Pelagibacter ubique to about 98% in the human genome.
RNA viruses such as the retrovirus HIV harbor ncRNAs for gene regulation such as the trans-activating response element (TAR), the binding site for the Tat protein for early viral gene expression. Tat has a highly basic domain comprising mostly Lys and Arg residues, resembling other RNA binding proteins. ncRNA also serves on viral RNA genomes as ribosomal entry sites, primer binding sites or packaging signals. DNA synthesis depends on RNA synthesis as initial event, with RNA primers as starters for DNA replication, inside of cells as FIGURE 1 | A compartment is shown with essential components of life as discussed in the text. Non-coding RNA (ncRNA), ribozymes or viroids, can perform many steps for life without protein-coding genes but only by structural information. Individual amino acids are indicated as black dots and may be available on Earth from the universe. DNA may have existed before retroviruses. The compartment can be interpreted as pre-virus or pre-cell. Viroid, green; RNA, red; DNA, black.
well as during retroviral replication, proving a requirement of RNA (Flint, 2015) .
The number of mammalian protein-coding genes is about 20,000. Surprisingly, this is only a fifth of the number of genes of bread wheat (Appels et al., 2018) . Tulips, maize and other plants also have larger genomes, indicating that the number of genes does not necessarily reflect the complexity of an organism. What makes these plant genomes so large, is still an open question. Could the giant genomes possibly be the result to breeding of plants by farmers or gardeners?
According to Szostak there are molecules which appear like relics from the RNA world such as acetyl-CoA or vitamin B12, both of which are bound to a ribonucleotide for no obvious reason -was it "forgotten" to be removed? (Roberts and Szostak, 1997; Szostak et al., 2001; Szostak, 2011) . Perhaps the connected RNA serves as structural stabilizer. Lipid vesicles could have formed the first compartments and enclosed ribozymes, tRNAs with selected amino acids, and RNA which became mRNA. Is this a pre-cell or pre-virus (Figure 1) ? Patel et al. (2015) demonstrated that the building blocks of life, ribonucleotides, lipids and amino acids, can be formed from C, H, O, P, N, S in a "one pot" synthesis. This study can be regarded as a follow-up study of the classical Urey-Miller in vitro synthesis of biomolecules (Miller, 1953; Miller and Urey, 1959) . Transition from the RNA to the DNA world was promoted by the formation of the reverse transcriptase. The enzyme was first described in retroviruses but it is almost ubiquitous and found in numerous cellular species, many of which with unknown functions (Simon and Zimmerly, 2008; Lescot et al., 2016) . It is an important link between the RNA and the DNA worlds. The name reverse transcriptase is historical and irritating because it is the "real" transcriptase during the transition from the RNA to the DNA world. Similarly, the ribonuclease H (RNase H) is an essential enzyme of retroviruses (Mölling et al., 1971) . The RNase H turned out to be one of the five most frequent and ancient proteins (Ma et al., 2008 ) that belongs to a superfamily of more than sixty different unique representatives and 152 families with numerous functions (Majorek et al., 2014) .
Some of the many tRNAs can become loaded with amino acids. There are viruses containing tRNA-like structures (TLS), resembling these early RNAs (Dreher, 2009) . The TLS of these viruses typically bind to a single amino acid. TLS-viruses include plant viruses, such as Turnip yellow mosaic virus, in Peanut clump virus, Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), and Brome mosaic virus. Only half a tRNA is found in Narnaviruses of fungi. The amino acids known to be components of tRNA-like viruses are valine, histidine and tyrosine. The structures were also designated as "mimicry, " enhancing translation (Dreher, 2009 (Dreher, , 2010 . They look like "frozen" precursor-like elements for protein synthesis. This combination of a partial tRNA linked to one amino acid can be interpreted as an evolutionary early step toward protein synthesis, trapped in a viral element.
Ribozymes are related to the protein-free viroids. Viroids are virus-like elements that belong to the virosphere, the world of viruses (Chela-Flores, 1994) . Viroids lack protein coats and therefore were initially not designated as viruses but virus-like viroids when they were discovered in 1971 by Theodor Diener. He described viroids as "living fossils" (Diener, 2016) (Figure 2) .
From infected potatoes, Diener isolated the Potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd) whose genome was about a 100-fold smaller than those of viruses known at that time. The viroids known today are ranging from 246 to 467 nucleotides. They contain circular single-stranded RNA, are protein-free and self-replicating with no genetic information, but only structural FIGURE 2 | Viroids are hairpin-loop structures and are shown schematically and as electron micrograph. Viroids are, like ribozymes, without genetic information and play major biological roles today in plant diseases, in carnation flowers, in liver cancer, as catalyst of protein synthesis in ribosomes and as circular regulatory RNAs, as "sponges" for other regulatory RNAs.
information in the form of hairpin-loops (Riesner et al., 1979) . They can generate copies of themselves in the appropriate environment. They were designated as the "frontiers of life" (Flores et al., 2014) .
The knowledge of virus composition was based on TMV and its crystallization by Wendell Stanley in 1935 (Pennazio and Roggero, 2000) . The genome of TMV is protein-coding singlestranded RNA of about 6,400 nucleotides that is enclosed by a rod-like protein coat. Viroids, in contrast, do not encode proteins and lack coats but they are closely related to viruses. Viroids can lose their autonomy and rely on host RNA polymerases to replicate, are capable of infecting plants and many are economically important pathogens. There are two families, the nucleus-replicating Pospiviroidae such as PSTVd and the chloroplast-replicating Avsunviroidae like the Avocado sunblotch viroid (ASBVd). Their replication requires host enzymes. Thus, autonomy is replaced by dependence on host enzymes and an intracellular lifestyle.
Most viroids are often enzymatically active ribozymes -yet they are examples that this trait can get lost as a result of changing environmental conditions. Loss of ribozyme activity is a functional, not a genetic loss. Only the nuclear variants, the Pospiviroidae, can lose their ribozyme activity and use the cellular RNase III enzyme for their replication. In contrast, the Avsunviroidae are still active hammerhead ribozymes. Thus, inside the nucleus of a host cell, the enzymatic RNA function can become unnecessary. Not genes, but a function, the catalytic activity, gets lost.
Viroids did apparently not gain genes but cooperated for a more complex lifestyle. For example, Carnation small viroid-like RNA (CarSV RNA) cooperates with a retrovirus and is accompanied by a homologous DNA generated by a reverse transcriptase. This enzyme presumably originates from a pararetrovirus of plants. Pararetroviruses package virus particles at a different stage during replication than retroviruses, the DNA, not the RNA. This unique combination between two viral elements has so far only been detected with CarSV in carnation flowers (Flores et al., 2005 (Flores et al., , 2014 . Why did such a cooperation evolve -perhaps by breeding gardeners? RNA is sensitive to degradation; therefore, genetic increase and growth of the genome may not be favorable energetically -at least not in plants. Gain of function is, in this case, cooperation.
The circular RNA (circRNA) is related to ribozymes/viroids as a chief regulator of other regulatory RNAs, a "sponge" absorbing small RNAs. Micro RNAs (miRNAs) are post-transcriptional regulators that are affected by the presence of circRNAs. circRNAs were detected in human and mouse brains and testes as well as in plants. They can bind 70 conserved miRNAs in a cell and amount up to 25,000 molecules (Hansen et al., 2013) . Their structure is reminiscent of catalytically active ribozymes.
There is an exceptional viroid that gained coding information and entered the human liver (Taylor, 2009) . The viroid is known as hepatitis delta virus (HDV). It has the smallest genome of any known animal virus of about 1,680 nucleotides. It has properties typical of viroids, since it contains circRNA, forms similar hairpin-loops and replicates in the nucleus using host enzymes. Two polymerases have to redirect their specificity from DNA to RNA to generate the HDV genome and antigenome. Both of them have ribozyme activity. In contrast to other ribozymes, HDV encodes a protein, the hepatitis delta antigen (HDVAg) that occurs in two forms, the small-HDVAg (24 kDa) supporting replication and the large-HDVAg (27 kDa) that helps virion assembly. The gene was presumably picked up from the host cell by recombination of HDV's mRNA intermediate with a host mRNA. Transmission depends on a helper virus, the Hepatitis B virus (HBV), which delivers the coat (Taylor, 2009 ) Does packaging by a helper virus protect the genome and thereby allow for a larger viroid to exist?
In plants, viroids may not be able to become bigger possibly due to their sensitivity to degradation -but they cannot become much smaller either. Only a single viroid is known that is completely composed of protein-coding RNA with triplets (AbouHaidar et al., 2014). Viroids and related replicating RNAs are error-prone replicating units and the error frequency imposes a certain minimal size onto them, as they would otherwise become extinct. This mechanism has been described as "error catastrophe, " which prevents survival (Eigen, 1971 (Eigen, , 2013 . The viroids and related RNAs are the smallest known replicons. Smaller ones would become extinct in the absence of repair systems.
In summary, RNA can catalyze many reactions. Protein enzymes which may have evolved later have higher catalytic activities. Ribozymes are carriers of information, but do not require coding genes. Information is stored in their sequence and structure. Thus, replication of an initial RNA is followed by flow of information, from DNA to RNA to protein, as described the Central Dogma (Crick, 1968) . Even an information flow from protein to DNA has been described for some archaeal proteins (Béguin et al., 2015) . The DNA-protein world contains numerous ncRNAs with key functions. ncRNA may serve as a model compound for the origin of life on other planets. Hereby not the chemical composition of this molecule is of prime relevance, but its simplicity and multifunctionality. Furthermore, RNA is software and hardware in a single molecule, which makes it unique in our world. There are other scenarios besides the here discussed "virus-first, " such as "protein-first", "metabolism-fist" or the "lipid world" (Segré et al., 2001; Andras and Andras, 2005; Vasas et al., 2010; Moelling, 2012) . Some of these alternative concepts were built on phylogenomics, the reconstruction of the tree of life by genome sequencing (Delsuc et al., 2005) . Surprisingly, it was Sir Francis Crick, one of the discoverers of the DNA double-helix, who stated that he would not be surprised about a world completely built of RNA. A similar prediction was made by Walter Gilbert (Crick, 1968; Gilbert, 1986) . What a vision! Our world was almost 50 years later defined as "RNAprotein" world (Altman, 2013) . One can speculate our world was built of ribozymes or viroids, which means "viruses first."
ncRNAs appear as relics from the past RNA world, before DNA, the genetic code and proteins evolved. However, ncRNA is essential in our biological DNA world today. It is possible to produce such ncRNA today in the test tube by loss of genic information from protein-coding RNA. This reduction to ncRNA was demonstrated in vitro with phage RNA. Phage Qβ genomic RNA, 4,217 nucleotides in length, was incubated in the presence of Qβ replicase, free nucleotides and salts, a rich milieu in the test tube. The RNA was allowed to replicate by means of the Qβ replicase. Serial transfer of aliquots to fresh medium led to ever faster replication rates and reduction of genomic size, down to 218 nucleotides of ncRNA in 74 generations. This study demonstrated that, depending on environmental conditions, an extreme gene reduction can take place. This experiment performed in 1965 was designated as "Spiegelman's Monster." Coding RNA became replicating ncRNA (Spiegelman et al., 1965; Kacian et al., 1972) ! Manfred Eigen extended this experiment and demonstrated further that a mixture containing no RNA to start with but only ribonucleotides and the Qβ replicase can under the right conditions in a test tube spontaneously generate self-replicating ncRNA. This evolved into a form similar to Spiegelman's Monster. The presence of the replicase enzyme was still necessary in these studies. Furthermore, a change in enzyme concentration and addition of short RNAs or an RNA intercalator influenced the arising RNA population (Sumper and Luce, 1975; Eigen, 2013) . Thus, the complexity of genomes depends on the environment: poor conditions lead to increased complexity and rich environments to reduced complexity.
The process demonstrated in this experiment with viral components indicates that reversion to simplicity, reduction in size, loss of genetic information and speed in replication can be major forces of life, even though this appears to be like a reversion of evolution. The experiment can perhaps be generalized from the test tube to a principle, that the most successful survivors on our planet are the viruses and microorganisms, which became the most abundant entities. Perhaps life can start from there again.
These studies raise the question of how RNA molecules can become longer, if the small polymers become smaller and smaller, replicate faster and outcompete longer ones. This may be overcome by heat flow across an open pore in submerged rocks, which concentrates replicating oligonucleotides from a constant feeding flow and selection for longer strands. This has been described for an increase from 100 to 1,000 nucleotides in vitro. RNA molecules shorter than 75 nucleotides will die out (Kreysing et al., 2015) . Could a poor environment lead to an increase of complexity? This could be tested. Ribozymes were shown to grow in size by uptake of genes, as demonstrated for HDV (Taylor, 2009 ).
An interesting recent unexpected example supporting the notion that environmental conditions influence genetic complexity, is the human gut microbiome. Its complexity increases with diverse food, while uniform rich food reduces its diversity and may lead to diseases such as obesity. Colonization of the human intestinal tract starts at birth. A few dozen bacterial and viral/phage species are conserved between individuals (core sequences) as a stable composition (Broecker et al., 2016c . Dysbiosis has been observed in several chronic diseases and in obesity, a loss of bacterial richness and diversity. Nutrition under affluent conditions with sugar-rich food contributes to obesity, which results in a significant reduction of the complexity of the microbiome. This reduction is difficult to revert (Cotillard et al., 2013; Le Chatelier et al., 2013) . The gut microbiome in human patients with obesity is reminiscent of the gene reduction described in the Spiegelman's Monster experiment: reduction of genes in a rich environment.
The reduction of the complexity of the microbiome is in part attributed to the action of phages, which under such conditions, defined as stress, lyse the bacteria. Fecal microbiota transplantation can even be replaced by soluble fractions containing phages or metabolites from the donor without bacteria (Ott et al., 2017) . Analogously, the most highly complex microbiomes are found in indigenous human tribes in Africa, which live on a broad variety of different nutrients. It is a slow process, though, to increase gut microbiota complexity by diverse nutrition. The obesity-associated microbiota that survive are fitter and more difficult to counteract. Urbanization and westernization of the diet is associated with a loss of microbial biodiversity, loss of microbial organisms and genes (Segata, 2015) .
To understand the mechanism and driving force for genome reduction, deletion rates were tested by insertion of an indicator gene into the Salmonella enterica genome. The loss of the indicator gene was monitored by serial passage in rich medium. After 1,000 generations about 25% of the deletions caused increased bacterial fitness. Deletions resulted in smaller genomes with reduced or absence of DNA repair genes (Koskiniemi et al., 2012) . Gene loss conferred a higher fitness to the bacteria under these experimental conditions.
The recently discovered mimiviruses and other giant viruses are worth considering for understanding the evolution of life with respect to the contribution of viruses. Their hosts are, for example, Acanthamoeba, Chlorella, and Coccolithus algae (Emiliania huxleyi), but also corals or sponges as discussed more recently. Mimiviruses were first discovered in cooling water towers in Bradford, United Kingdom in 2003 with about 1,000 genes, most of which unrelated to previously known genes. Mimiviruses have received attention because they contain elements that were considered hallmarks of living cells, not of viruses, such as elements required for protein synthesis, tRNAs and amino acid transferases. The mimiviruses harbor these building blocks as incomplete sets not sufficient for independent protein synthesis as bacteria or archaea can perform, preventing them from leading an autonomous life (La Scola et al., 2003 Scola et al., , 2008 . They are larger than some bacteria. Giant viruses can be looked at as being on an evolutionary path toward a cellular organism. Alternatively, they may have evolved from a cellular organism by loss of genetic information (Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015) . Giant viruses have frequently taken up genes from their hosts by horizontal gene transfer (HGT) (La Scola et al., 2008; Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015; Colson et al., 2018) . A graph on genome sizes shows that mimiviruses and bacteria overlap in size, indicating a continuous transition between viruses and bacteria and between living and non-living worlds (based on Holmes, 2011) (Figure 3) . Other giant viruses, such as megaviruses, were discovered in the ocean of Chile with 1,120 genes. Most recently the Klosneuvirus was identified in the sewage of the monastery Klosterneuburg in Austria in 2017 with 1.57 million (mio) basepairs (Mitch, 2017) . Pithovirus sibericum is the largest among giant viruses discovered to date with a diameter of 1.5 microns, a genome of 470,000 bp with 467 putative genes, 1.6 microns in length, and it is presumably 30,000 years old as it was recovered from permafrost in Siberia (Legendre et al., 2014) . The smaller Pandoraviruses with 1 micron in length have five times larger genomes, 2,500,000 bp (Philippe et al., 2013) (Figure 3) .
The giant viruses can even be hosts to smaller viruses, the virophages, reminiscent of bacteriophages, the viruses of bacteria. These virophages such as Sputnik are only 50 nm in size with 18,343 bp of circular dsDNA and 21 predicted proteincoding genes. They replicate in viral factories and consume the resources of the mimivirus, thereby destroying it. Some, virophages can even integrate into the genome of the cellular host and can be reactivated when the host is infected by giant viruses. Thus, giant viruses suggest that viruses are close to living entities or may have been alive (La Scola et al., 2008; Fischer and Hackl, 2016) . In biology it is common to distinguish between living and dead matter by the ability to synthesize proteins and replicate autonomously. The giant viruses may be considered as missing link between the two, because they harbor "almost" the protein synthesis apparatus. The transition from living to the non-living world is continuous, not separated by a sharp borderline (Figure 3) .
Viruses are not considered alive by most of the scientific community and as written in textbooks, because they cannot replicate autonomously. Yet some of the giant viruses are equipped with almost all components of the protein synthesis machinery close to bacteria suggesting that they belong to the living matter (Schulz et al., 2017) . The ribozymes may have been the earliest replicating entity. Perhaps also other viruses were initially more independent of the early Earth than they are today. As described in Figure 1 there may have been initially no major difference between an early virus or an early cell. Only later viruses may have given up their autonomous replication and became parasites -as has been described for some bacteria (see below).
Efforts have been made to identify the smallest living cell that is still autonomously replicating. Among the presumably smallest naturally occurring bacteria is Pelagibacter ubique of the SAR11 clade of bacteria (Giovannoni, 2017) , which was discovered in 1990. It is an alpha-proteobacterium with 1,389 genes present ubiquitously in all oceans. It can reach up to 10 28 free living cells in total and represents about 25% of microbial plankton cells. Very little of its DNA is non-coding. It harbors podophage-type phages, designated as "pelagiphage" (Zhao et al., 2013) . This small bacterium was designated as the most common organism on the planet. Why is it so successful? This autonomous bacterium is smaller than some parasitic giant viruses. Craig Venter, who first succeeded in sequencing the human genome, tried to minimize the putative smallest genome of a living species, from Mycoplasma mycoides, a parasitic bacterium that lives in ruminants (Gibson et al., 2008 (Gibson et al., , 2010 . His group synthesized a genome of 531,000 bp with 473 genes, 149 of them (32%) with unknown functions (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Among the smallest parasitic living organisms is Nanoarchaeum equitans. It is a thermophile archaeon which lives at 80 • C and at pH 6 with 2% salt (Huber et al., 2003) . Its genome has a size of 490,000 bp and encodes 540 genes. N. equitans is an obligate symbiont of a bigger archaeon, Ignicoccus riding on it as on a horse, hence the name (Huber et al., 2003) .
The world of viruses covers a range of three logs in size of their genomes: from zero genes to about 2,500 genes amounting to about 2,500,000 bp of DNA. The zero-gene viroids are about 300 bases in length (Figure 3) .
The virosphere is the most successful reservoir of biological entities on our planet in terms of numbers of particles, speed of replication, growth rates, and sequence space. There are about 10 33 viruses on our planet and they are present in every single existing species (Suttle, 2005) .
There is no living species without viruses! Viruses also occur freely in the oceans, in the soil, in clouds up to the stratosphere and higher, to at least 300 km in altitude. They populate the human intestine, birth canal, and the outside of the body as protective layer against microbial populations. Microbes contain phages that are activated during stress conditions such as lack of nutrients, change in temperatures, lack of space and other changes of environmental conditions.
One of the most earth-shaking papers of this century was the publication of the human genome sequence (Lander et al., 2001) . About half, possibly even two-thirds of the sequence are composed of more or less complete endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) and related retroelements (REs) (de Koning et al., 2011) . REs amplify via copy-and-paste mechanisms involving a reverse transcriptase step from an RNA intermediate into DNA. In addition, DNA transposable elements (TEs) move by a cutand-paste mechanism. The origin of REs is being discussed as remnants of ancient retroviral germline infections that became evolutionarily fixed in the genome. About 450,000 human ERV (HERV) elements constitute about 8% of the human genome consisting of hallmark retroviral elements like the gag, pol, env genes and flanking long terminal repeats (LTR) that act as promoters (Lander et al., 2001) . Howard Temin, one of the discoverers of the reverse transcriptase, in 1985 already described endogenous retrovirus-like elements, which he estimated to about 10% of the human and mouse genome sequence (Temin, 1985) . The actual number is about 45% as estimated today (Lander et al., 2001) . In some genes such as the Protein Kinase Inhibitor B (PKIB) gene we determined about 70% retrovirusrelated sequences (Moelling and Broecker, 2015) . Is there a limit? Could it have been 100%? Retroviruses are estimated to have entered the lineage of the mammalian genome 550 million years ago (MYA) (Hayward, 2017) . Older ERV sequences may exist but are unrecognizable today due to the accumulation of mutations.
ERVs undergo mutations, deletions or homologous recombination events with large deletions and can become as short as solo LTR elements, which are a few hundred bp in length -the left-overs from full-length retroviral genomes of about 10,000 bp. The LTR promoters can deregulate neighboring genes. Homologous recombination events may be considered as gene loss or gene reduction events. It is the assumption that the ERVs, which were no longer needed for host cell defense, were no longer selected for by evolution and consequently deleted as unnecessary consumers of energy.
Eugene Koonin points out that infection and integration are unique events occurring at a fast pace, while loss and gene reduction may take much longer time frames (Wolf and Koonin, 2013) .
A frequent gene reduction of eukaryotic genomes is the loss of the viral envelope protein encoded by the env gene. Without a coat, retroviruses can no longer leave the cell and infect other cells. They lose mobility and become obligatory intracellular elements. Helper viruses can supply envelope proteins in trans and mobilize the viruses. TEs or REs can be regarded as examples of coat-free intracellular virus relics -or could it have been the other way round, perhaps precursors of full-length retroviruses?
These elements can be amplified intracellularly and modify the host genomes by integration with the potential danger of gene disruption and genetic changes. REs can lead to gene duplications and pseudogene development, with one copy for stable conservation of acquired functions and the other one for innovations (Cotton and Page, 2005) . Such duplications constitute large amounts of mammalian genomes (Zhang, 2003) . Retroviruses have an RNase H moiety duplication, one of which serves as a catalytically inactive linker between the RT polymerase and the enzymatically active RNase H (Xiong and Eickbush, 1990; Malik and Eickbush, 2001; Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) . This gene duplication dates back to 500 mio years (Cotton and Page, 2005) .
Gene duplications are a common cause of cancer, which often occurs only in the genome of the cancer cell itself, less affecting offsprings. Myc, Myb, ErbB2, Ras, and Raf are oncogenes amplified in diverse types of human cancers (Vogelstein and Kinzler, 2002) . The ability of retroviruses to integrate makes them distinct from endosymbionts which stay separate. Yet the net result is very similar, acquisition of new genetic information, which is transmitted to the next generation, if the germline is infected and endogenization of the virus occurred.
Viral integration is not limited to eukaryotic cells but also a mechanism in prokaryotes for maintenance of the lysogenic state of phages inside bacteria.
Also, for other eukaryotic viruses such as HBV, the envelope surface antigen BHsAg can be deleted, which leads to an obligatory intracellular life style for the virus, which especially in the presence of HCV promotes cancer (Yang et al., 2016) .
HIV has been shown to rapidly lose one of its auxiliary genes, nef, originally for negative factor. The gene was lost within a rather low number of passages of the virus grown under tissue culture conditions by selection for high virus titer producing cells. Deletion of nef resulted in a significant increase of the virus titer in culture -hence the name. The nef gene product was of no need inside tissue culture cells, rather it was inhibitory for replication. However, it is essential for pathogenicity in animals, and subsequently nef was reinterpreted as "necessary factor" (Flint, 2015) .
Also, the human hosts of HIV can lose a significant terminal portion of a seven transmembrane receptor in lymphocytes, the primary target cell for HIV entry and for virus uptake. This molecule, the CCR5 cytokine receptor is truncated by 32 carboxy-terminal amino acids (CCR5-32), disabling the receptor functionally. The allele frequency of the mutant CCR5-32 mutant is about 10% in the European population, making these people resistant to HIV infections (Solloch et al., 2017) . This gene loss in Europeans has been shown to make the individuals resistant not only against HIV infection but also against malaria. This may have been the selective pressure in the past before HIV/AIDS arose. No side effect for humans lacking this gene has been described (Galvani and Slatkin, 2003) .
Viruses have been proven to be drivers of evolution (Villarreal and Witzany, 2010) , including the human genome, which by at least 45% is composed of sequences related to retroviruses. In addition, endogenized retroviruses supplied the syncytin genes that are essential for the development of the mammalian placenta, and allowed the growth of embryos without its rejection by the maternal immune system (Dupressoir et al., 2012) . Thus, the same property which causes immunodeficiency in HIV-infected patients and leads to AIDS causes syncytia formation, cell fusion after infection by a retrovirus. Viruses have also been proposed to be at the origin of the evolution of adaptive immunity (Villarreal, 2009 ). Thus, viruses shaped genomes by supplying essential genes and mechanisms.
Endogenization of retroviruses has occurred in the mammalian genomes for at least 550 mio years (Hayward, 2017) . If the integrated ERVs did not provide any selective advantage, they deteriorated and accumulated mutations with loss of function. This was directly proven by reconstruction of an infectious retrovirus from the consensus sequence of 9 defective endogenous virus sequences, designated as Phoenix. The virus was expressed from a constructed synthetic DNA clone in cell culture and formed virus particles identified by high resolution microscopic analysis (Dewannieux and Heidmann, 2013) .
The koalas in Australia are currently undergoing endogenization of a retrovirus (koala retrovirus, KoRV) in "real time" and demonstrate possible consequences for immunity. In the early 1900s, some individuals were transferred to islands, including Kangaroo Island, close to the Australian mainland for repopulation purposes, as koalas were threatened to become extinct. Today, the majority of the koala population is infected by KoRV, which is closely related to the Gibbon ape leukemia virus (GALV). Yet, koalas isolated on Kangaroo Island are KoRV negative, which allows dating the introduction of KoRV into the koala population to about one hundred years ago. Many of the infected koalas fell ill and died, yet some populations became resistant within about 100 years, corresponding to about 10 generations. The koalas likely developed resistance due to the integrated DNA proviruses. The retrovirus is transmitted as exogenous as well as endogenous virus, similar to the Jaagsiekte sheep retrovirus (JSRV), whereby the endogenized viruses protect with a viral gene product, such as Env, against de novo infections by "superinfection exclusion" (Tarlinton, 2012) . The contribution of retroviruses to the antiviral defense is striking, since all retroviral genes have analogous genes in the siRNA/RNAi defense mechanism of eukaryotic cells (Moelling et al., 2006) .
Retroviruses can protect against infection by other related viruses, for example, by expressing Env proteins that block cellsurface receptors (Villarreal, 2011) . A comparable mechanism protects bacterial cells against DNA phages, by integrated phage DNA fragments that are transcribed into mRNA and hybridize to incoming new DNA phages and thereby lead to their destruction by hybrid-specific nucleases, CRISPR/Cas immunity (Charpentier and Doudna, 2013) . It is often not realized that immunity acquisition in bacteria and mammalian cells follow analogous mechanisms (Figure 4) .
Integration of retroviruses normally occurs in somatic cells after infection as an obligatory step during the viral life cycle. Infection of germline cells can lead to transmission to the next generation and ultimately result in inherited resistance. Endogenized retroviruses likely caused resistance FIGURE 4 | Viruses protect against viruses: retroviruses protect a cell against a new infection by a similar virus designated as "superinfection exclusion" or viral interference. This is mediated by viral gene products such as proteins or nucleic acids. Similarly, phages protect against phages: superinfection of bacteria is prevented by CRISPR/Cas RNA originating from previous infections. The mechanisms of defense against viruses and phages are analogous. Protection by viruses or phages against superinfections represents cellular defense and acquired immunity. The four examples are discussed in the text.
to the exogenous counterparts. Similarly, resistance to Simian Immune Deficiency virus (SIV) in some monkey species may be explained by endogenization (Li et al., 2017 (Li et al., , 2018 . In the case of phages and their prokaryotic hosts the mechanism is described as CRISPR/Cas, which follow analogous principles of "endogenization" of incoming genetic material for subsequent exclusion.
One may speculate that HIV may also eventually become endogenized into the human genome. There is some evidence that HIV can infect human germline cells and can be transmitted to the embryonic genome (Wang et al., 2011) . How long this may take is not known -10 generations?
The loss of function of ERVs can occur by mutations, deletions of the env or other genes and ultimately all coding genes by homologous recombination, leaving behind only one LTR. The number of retrovirus-like elements add up to about 450,000, corresponding to 8% of the human genome (Lander et al., 2001; Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). The promoter regions were analyzed for their contribution to cancer by activating neighboring genes -as a consequence of a former retrovirus infection. Indeed, activated cellular genes by "downstream promotion" were identified in animal studies with activation of the myc gene as one of many examples, leading to chronic, not acute development of cancer (Ott et al., 2013) . As a general mechanism for human cancer today the LTRs are, however, not identified as a major culprit. Most of the ERVs we find today have been integrated during evolution in introns or other regions where their presence is relatively harmless. Did the other ones result in death of the carriers which disappeared? The effects of LTRs on the expression levels of neighboring host genes was studied with the endogenous human virus, HERV-K, as a possible cause of cancer, but this appears not to be a general phenomenon (Broecker et al., 2016b) . As shown for the koalas, ERVs can confer immunity to viral infections (Feschotte and Gilbert, 2012) .
A related ERV, HERV-H, was shown to produce an RNA that keeps early embryonic cells pluripotent and even revert adult cells to regain pluripotency (Grow et al., 2015) . Thus, the role of ERVs may be more complex than we presently know.
Transposable elements and REs that lost the ability of cellular transmission by deletion of the coat protein majorly contribute to genetic complexity of host cells. They are "locked" inside the cells and are major drivers of the increase of genetic complexity (Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). One could speculate that these intracellular elements are replicationincompetent retroviruses lacking coats (Lander et al., 2001) . Bats transmit viruses such as Ebola and SARS coronavirus without suffering from disease (Beltz, 2018) . Even RNA viruses such as Bornaviruses have been shown to integrate by illegitimate reverse transcription, possibly also supplying immunity against superinfection (Katzourakis and Gifford, 2010) .
There are two prominent events that significantly contributed to the success of life and the formation of cells. Both of them are associated with gene reduction. This phenomenon may play a role for the evolution of viruses from autonomous to parasitic lifestyles. In the 1960s Lynn Margulis proposed an extracellular origin for mitochondria (Margulis, 1970 (Margulis, , 1993 ). An ancestral cell, perhaps an archaeon, was infected by an anaerobic bacterium, which gave rise to mitochondria. Similarly, cyanobacteria formed the chloroplasts in modern plant cells. Mitochondria arose around 1.45 billion years ago (BYA) (Embley and Martin, 2006) . Mitochondria and chloroplasts are the most striking examples for a change in lifestyle from autonomous bacteria to endosymbionts. This transition is often considered as extremely rare and a hallmark of evolution of life on our planet. However, there are many other obligate intracellular parasites such as Rickettsia, Chlamydia trachomatis, Coxiella burnetii (the causative agent of Q fever), Mycobacterium leprae, M. tuberculosis, and M. mycoides (Beare et al., 2006) .
The change of lifestyle of the endosymbionts in the two cases of mitochondria and chloroplasts is striking. Both of them drastically reduced their genetic make-up. Mitochondria contain less than 37 genes, left from the original about 3,000 genes. Is endogenization of retroviruses, the ERVs, which are integrated into germline cells, related to endosymbiosis? Are these endosymbionts models for the transition from autonomous lifestyle to a parasitic life-which may have taken place with viruses? A more recent typical example for a reductive evolution are Rickettsia. These bacteria were assumed for some time to be viruses because of their obligatory intracellular parasitic existence. Rickettsia have evolved from autonomously replicating bacteria. Reductive evolution of endosymbionts can yield bacteria with tiny genomes on the expense of autonomous extracellular life. Their genomes are 1.11 mio bp in length with about 834 protein-coding genes, and loss of 24% by reductive evolution (Ogata et al., 2001) . Rickettsia may have some relationship with cyanobacteria, which are considered as the major symbionts.
Can one speculate that viruses may have been autonomous entities initially? Viroids may have undergone transition from autonomy to parasites, just as shown for mitochondria, chloroplasts or Rickettsia? To which extent have viruses been autonomous and independent of cellular metabolisms originally -and contributed to the origin of cells? Could they only later have lost their autonomy and become parasitic?
Viruses are minimalistic in their composition and must have undergone stringent gene reductions (Flint, 2015) . How small can their genomes become? Most coding RNA viruses still contain regulatory elements, ncRNA at the 3 and 5 terminal regions for ribosomal entry, protein synthesis, transcriptional regulation, and others.
A subgroup of retroviruses is an interesting example in respect to simultaneous loss and gain of genetic information. The oncogenic retroviruses or tumorviruses can recombine with cellular genes which under the promoters of retroviruses can become oncogenes and drivers of cancer. About a hundred oncogenes have been selected for in the laboratories and studied over decades for understanding the molecular mechanisms of cancer. Selection for growth advantages of the host cells led to the discovery of the fastest growth-promoting oncogenes we know today, such as Ras, Raf, ErbB or Myc, which are in part successful targets for anticancer drugs (Moelling et al., 1984) .
These oncogenes were in most cases taken up by the retroviruses at the expense of structural (gag), replicating (pol) or envelope (env) genes, and are often expressed as fusion proteins with Gag. Thus, oncogenic retroviruses are obligatory intracellular defective viruses and were selected for in the laboratory by researchers for the oncogenes with the most potent growth promoting ability. They need the supply of replicatory genes in trans from co-infecting helper viruses to infect other cells (Flint, 2015) . Retroviruses are able to pick up cellular genes, transfer and integrate them into neighboring cells. Some strains of Rous sarcoma virus maintain replication competent when carrying the cell-derived src (for sarcoma) oncogene encoding a protein of 536 amino acids that apparently can fit into the retroviral particle along with the full-size viral genome (Broecker et al., 2016a) . Spatial reasons may have influenced the formation of oncogenic retroviruses and limited their size and thereby led to their defective phenotypes.
There are indications that the uncontrolled activity of (retro)transposons in germline cells can result in diseases such as male infertility -presumably by "error catastrophe, " caused by too many transposition events. In mammals, piRNAs tame transposon activity by means of the RNase H activity of PIWI proteins during spermatogenesis (Girard et al., 2006) .
Only a minority of viruses are pathogens; most of them do not cause diseases. On the contrary, they are most important as drivers of evolution, as transmitters of genetic material, as innovative agents. In particular, the RNA viruses are the most innovative ones. Some of them are pathogenic and dangerous, such as HIV or influenza virus, or viroids in plants. RNA viruses are able to change so rapidly that the host immune system is unable to counteract the infection. Pathogenicity arises when environmental conditions change, for instance, when a virus enters a new organism or species.
Increase of cellular complexity by viruses is an important feature of evolution. Such major evolutionary changes are recently taken as arguments against the evolutionary theory by Charles Darwin who considered gradual changes, small increments by mutations as the main basis for selection and evolution. New criticism is addressing this thinking, considering larger changes as evolutionary drivers. Such changes arise by many complex phenomena such as endosymbiosis, infection by prokaryotes, viruses and fungi, recombination of genes, HGT, infections, sex. Dramatic changes such as endosymbiosis or pathogen infections extend Darwin's concept of evolution.
There are numerous examples for the contribution of viruses to the evolution of life since at least as long as 550 MYA (Hayward, 2017) . But genetic noise through random mutations does not allow us to go back to the origin of life. It may not be impossible that the earliest compartment was indistinguishable, either a pre-cell or a pre-virus. By analogy one may speculate that at some point autonomous viruses gave up independence for an obligatory intracellular life -as has been described for mitochondria and chloroplasts but also intracellular bacteria such as Rickettsia. This speculation is based on the concept that early life must have started simple and with high genetic variability and then became more complex. But complexity can be given up for a less energy consuming lifestyle with small genomes and high speed of replication (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . Therefore, the question may be repeated: "Are viruses our oldest ancestors?" Some fossil life can be partially reproduced in vitro by Spiegelman's Monster and Eigen's follow-up experiments, explaining the great surviving potential of simple ncRNA.
Viruses can be pathogens, but their recognition as primarily causing diseases is wrong. This notion is based on the history of viruses in medicine, as explained in a book entitled "Viruses: More Friends Than Foes" (Moelling, 2017) . The scenario described here focuses on viruses as drivers of evolution.
The early RNA world gained interest 20-30 years ago as evidenced by the references provided above. Surprisingly, there are scientists who still believe in the "pansperm hypothesis" and think that retroviruses are of extraterrestric origin (Steele et al., 2018) . The recent interest in the origin of life arose from the newly discovered exoplanets whose number increases daily -and which may be as numerous as 10 25 . Thus, pure statistics make some people believe that there is extraterrestrial life.
The extraterrestric life is mimicked in laboratories on Earth with many assumptions -perhaps this overview stimulates some thinking. The discussion presented here should be taken as concept about simple replicating and evolving entities possibly arising from different building blocks in other environments, with structure being more relevant than sequence. | How can DNA arise chemically from RNA? | 1,183 | deoxyribozymes can form from ribonucleotides (Wilson and Szostak, 1999) . Thus, DNA can arise from RNA chemically, without the key protein enzyme, the reverse transcriptase. | 3,619 |
1,690 | Viruses and Evolution – Viruses First? A Personal Perspective
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433886/
SHA: f3b9fc0f8e0a431366196d3e835e1ec368b379d1
Authors: Moelling, Karin; Broecker, Felix
Date: 2019-03-19
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00523
License: cc-by
Abstract: The discovery of exoplanets within putative habitable zones revolutionized astrobiology in recent years. It stimulated interest in the question about the origin of life and its evolution. Here, we discuss what the roles of viruses might have been at the beginning of life and during evolution. Viruses are the most abundant biological entities on Earth. They are present everywhere, in our surrounding, the oceans, the soil and in every living being. Retroviruses contributed to about half of our genomic sequences and to the evolution of the mammalian placenta. Contemporary viruses reflect evolution ranging from the RNA world to the DNA-protein world. How far back can we trace their contribution? Earliest replicating and evolving entities are the ribozymes or viroids fulfilling several criteria of life. RNA can perform many aspects of life and influences our gene expression until today. The simplest structures with non-protein-coding information may represent models of life built on structural, not genetic information. Viruses today are obligatory parasites depending on host cells. Examples of how an independent lifestyle might have been lost include mitochondria, chloroplasts, Rickettsia and others, which used to be autonomous bacteria and became intracellular parasites or endosymbionts, thereby losing most of their genes. Even in vitro the loss of genes can be recapitulated all the way from coding to non-coding RNA. Furthermore, the giant viruses may indicate that there is no sharp border between living and non-living entities but an evolutionary continuum. Here, it is discussed how viruses can lose and gain genes, and that they are essential drivers of evolution. This discussion may stimulate the thinking about viruses as early possible forms of life. Apart from our view “viruses first”, there are others such as “proteins first” and “metabolism first.”
Text: Mycoplasma mycoides by systematic deletion of individual genes resulted in a synthetic minimal genome of 473 genes (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Can one consider simpler living entities?
There are elements with zero genes that fulfill many criteria for early life: ribozymes, catalytic RNAs closely related to viroids. They were recovered in vitro from 10 15 molecules (aptamers), 220 nucleotides in length, by 10 rounds of selection. Among the many RNA species present in this collection of quasispecies RNAs were catalytically active members, enzymatically active ribozymes. The sequence space for 220-mer RNAs is about 3 × 10 132 (Eigen, 1971; Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Brackett and Dieckmann, 2006) .
The selected ribozymes were able to replicate, cleave, join, and form peptide bonds. They can polymerize progeny chemically, allow for mutations to occur and can evolve. One molecule serves as catalyst, the other one as substrate. Replication of ribozymes was demonstrated in the test tube (Lincoln and Joyce, 2009) . Ribozymes can form peptide bonds between amino acids (Zhang and Cech, 1997) . Thus, small peptides were available by ribozyme activity. Consequently, an RNA modification has been proposed as peptide nucleic acid (PNA), with more stable peptide bonds instead of phosphodiester bonds (Zhang and Cech, 1997; Joyce, 2002) . Replication of RNA molecules can be performed chemically from RNA without polymerase enzymes. In addition, deoxyribozymes can form from ribonucleotides (Wilson and Szostak, 1999) . Thus, DNA can arise from RNA chemically, without the key protein enzyme, the reverse transcriptase.
An entire living world is possible from non-coding RNA (ncRNA) before evolution of the genetic code and protein enzymes. Ribozymes naturally consist of circular single-stranded RNAs (Orgel, 2004) . They lack the genetic triplet code and do not encode proteins. Instead, they exhibit structural information by hairpin-loops that form hydrogen bonds between incomplete double strands, and loops free to interact with other molecules. They represent a quasispecies in which many species of RNA may form, such as ribozymes, tRNA-like molecules, and other ncRNAs. RNAs within such a pool can bind amino acids. Ninety different amino acids have been identified on the Murchison meteorite found in Australia, while on Earth only about 20 of them are used for protein synthesis (Meierhenrich, 2008) . Where formation of ribozymes occurred on the early Earth is a matter of speculation. The hydrothermal vents such as black smokers in the deep ocean are possibilities where life may have started (Martin et al., 2008) . There, temperature gradients and clay containing minerals such as magnesium or manganese are available. Pores or niches offer possibilities for concentration of building blocks, which is required for chemical reactions to occur. Interestingly, also ice is a candidate for ribozyme formation and chemical reactions. Ice crystals displace the biomolecules into the liquid phase, which leads to concentration, creating a quasicellular compartmentalization where de novo synthesis of nucleotide precursors is promoted. There, RNA and ribozymes can emerge, which are capable of self-replication (Attwater et al., 2010) .
tRNA-amino acid complexes can find RNAs as "mRNAs." Such interactions could have contributed to the evolution of the genetic code. This sequence of events can lead to primitive ribosome precursors. Ribozymes are the essential catalytic elements in ribosomes: "The ribosome is a ribozyme" (Cech, 2000) , supplemented with about a hundred scaffold proteins later during evolution. The proteins have structural functions and contribute indirectly to enzymatic activity. Are these ribosomebound ribozymes fossils from the early Earth? Small peptides can be formed by ribozymes before ribosomes evolved, whereby single or dimeric amino acids may originate from the universe (Meierhenrich, 2008) .
Small peptides with basic amino acids can increase the catalytic activity of ribozymes as shown in vitro (Müller et al., 1994) . Such proteins are known as RNA-binding proteins from RNA viruses that protect the RNA genome, with motifs such as RAPRKKG of the nucleocapsid NCp7 of HIV (Schmalzbauer et al., 1996) . Peptides can enhance the catalytic activity of ribozymes up to a 100-fold (Müller et al., 1994) . Such peptides of RNA viruses serve as chaperones that remove higher ordered RNA structures, allowing for more efficient interaction of RNA molecules and increasing transcription rates of RNA polymerases (Müller et al., 1994) . Ribonucleoproteins may have also been functionally important during the evolution of ribosomes (Harish and Caetano-Anolles, 2012) .
These pre-ribosomal structures are also similar to precursorlike structures of retroviruses. Reverse transcription can be performed by ribozymes chemically. This action does not necessarily require a protein polymerase such as the reverse transcriptase. Similarly, deoxyribonucleotides can arise by removal of an oxygen without the need of a protein enzyme (a reductase) as today, and allow for DNA polymerization (Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Joyce, 2002) . The same elements of the precursors for ribosomes are also building blocks of retroviruses, which may have a similar evolutionary origin (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . tRNAs serve as primers for the reverse transcriptase, and the sequence of promoters of transposable elements are derived from tRNAs (Lander et al., 2001) . The ribozymes developed into more complex self-cleaving group II introns with insertion of genes encoding a reverse transcriptase and additional proteins (Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) (Figure 1) .
It came as a surprise that the genomes of almost all species are rich in ncDNA, transcribed into ncRNAs but not encoding proteins, as evidenced, for instance, by the "Encyclopedia of DNA Elements" (ENCODE) project. ncDNA amounts to more than 98% of the human DNA genome (Deveson et al., 2017) . Higher organisms tend to have more non-coding information, which allows for more complex modes of gene regulation. The ncRNAs are regulators of the protein-coding sequences. Highly complex organisms such as humans typically have a high number of ncRNA and regulatory mechanisms. ncRNA can range from close to zero in the smallest bacteria such as Pelagibacter ubique to about 98% in the human genome.
RNA viruses such as the retrovirus HIV harbor ncRNAs for gene regulation such as the trans-activating response element (TAR), the binding site for the Tat protein for early viral gene expression. Tat has a highly basic domain comprising mostly Lys and Arg residues, resembling other RNA binding proteins. ncRNA also serves on viral RNA genomes as ribosomal entry sites, primer binding sites or packaging signals. DNA synthesis depends on RNA synthesis as initial event, with RNA primers as starters for DNA replication, inside of cells as FIGURE 1 | A compartment is shown with essential components of life as discussed in the text. Non-coding RNA (ncRNA), ribozymes or viroids, can perform many steps for life without protein-coding genes but only by structural information. Individual amino acids are indicated as black dots and may be available on Earth from the universe. DNA may have existed before retroviruses. The compartment can be interpreted as pre-virus or pre-cell. Viroid, green; RNA, red; DNA, black.
well as during retroviral replication, proving a requirement of RNA (Flint, 2015) .
The number of mammalian protein-coding genes is about 20,000. Surprisingly, this is only a fifth of the number of genes of bread wheat (Appels et al., 2018) . Tulips, maize and other plants also have larger genomes, indicating that the number of genes does not necessarily reflect the complexity of an organism. What makes these plant genomes so large, is still an open question. Could the giant genomes possibly be the result to breeding of plants by farmers or gardeners?
According to Szostak there are molecules which appear like relics from the RNA world such as acetyl-CoA or vitamin B12, both of which are bound to a ribonucleotide for no obvious reason -was it "forgotten" to be removed? (Roberts and Szostak, 1997; Szostak et al., 2001; Szostak, 2011) . Perhaps the connected RNA serves as structural stabilizer. Lipid vesicles could have formed the first compartments and enclosed ribozymes, tRNAs with selected amino acids, and RNA which became mRNA. Is this a pre-cell or pre-virus (Figure 1) ? Patel et al. (2015) demonstrated that the building blocks of life, ribonucleotides, lipids and amino acids, can be formed from C, H, O, P, N, S in a "one pot" synthesis. This study can be regarded as a follow-up study of the classical Urey-Miller in vitro synthesis of biomolecules (Miller, 1953; Miller and Urey, 1959) . Transition from the RNA to the DNA world was promoted by the formation of the reverse transcriptase. The enzyme was first described in retroviruses but it is almost ubiquitous and found in numerous cellular species, many of which with unknown functions (Simon and Zimmerly, 2008; Lescot et al., 2016) . It is an important link between the RNA and the DNA worlds. The name reverse transcriptase is historical and irritating because it is the "real" transcriptase during the transition from the RNA to the DNA world. Similarly, the ribonuclease H (RNase H) is an essential enzyme of retroviruses (Mölling et al., 1971) . The RNase H turned out to be one of the five most frequent and ancient proteins (Ma et al., 2008 ) that belongs to a superfamily of more than sixty different unique representatives and 152 families with numerous functions (Majorek et al., 2014) .
Some of the many tRNAs can become loaded with amino acids. There are viruses containing tRNA-like structures (TLS), resembling these early RNAs (Dreher, 2009) . The TLS of these viruses typically bind to a single amino acid. TLS-viruses include plant viruses, such as Turnip yellow mosaic virus, in Peanut clump virus, Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), and Brome mosaic virus. Only half a tRNA is found in Narnaviruses of fungi. The amino acids known to be components of tRNA-like viruses are valine, histidine and tyrosine. The structures were also designated as "mimicry, " enhancing translation (Dreher, 2009 (Dreher, , 2010 . They look like "frozen" precursor-like elements for protein synthesis. This combination of a partial tRNA linked to one amino acid can be interpreted as an evolutionary early step toward protein synthesis, trapped in a viral element.
Ribozymes are related to the protein-free viroids. Viroids are virus-like elements that belong to the virosphere, the world of viruses (Chela-Flores, 1994) . Viroids lack protein coats and therefore were initially not designated as viruses but virus-like viroids when they were discovered in 1971 by Theodor Diener. He described viroids as "living fossils" (Diener, 2016) (Figure 2) .
From infected potatoes, Diener isolated the Potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd) whose genome was about a 100-fold smaller than those of viruses known at that time. The viroids known today are ranging from 246 to 467 nucleotides. They contain circular single-stranded RNA, are protein-free and self-replicating with no genetic information, but only structural FIGURE 2 | Viroids are hairpin-loop structures and are shown schematically and as electron micrograph. Viroids are, like ribozymes, without genetic information and play major biological roles today in plant diseases, in carnation flowers, in liver cancer, as catalyst of protein synthesis in ribosomes and as circular regulatory RNAs, as "sponges" for other regulatory RNAs.
information in the form of hairpin-loops (Riesner et al., 1979) . They can generate copies of themselves in the appropriate environment. They were designated as the "frontiers of life" (Flores et al., 2014) .
The knowledge of virus composition was based on TMV and its crystallization by Wendell Stanley in 1935 (Pennazio and Roggero, 2000) . The genome of TMV is protein-coding singlestranded RNA of about 6,400 nucleotides that is enclosed by a rod-like protein coat. Viroids, in contrast, do not encode proteins and lack coats but they are closely related to viruses. Viroids can lose their autonomy and rely on host RNA polymerases to replicate, are capable of infecting plants and many are economically important pathogens. There are two families, the nucleus-replicating Pospiviroidae such as PSTVd and the chloroplast-replicating Avsunviroidae like the Avocado sunblotch viroid (ASBVd). Their replication requires host enzymes. Thus, autonomy is replaced by dependence on host enzymes and an intracellular lifestyle.
Most viroids are often enzymatically active ribozymes -yet they are examples that this trait can get lost as a result of changing environmental conditions. Loss of ribozyme activity is a functional, not a genetic loss. Only the nuclear variants, the Pospiviroidae, can lose their ribozyme activity and use the cellular RNase III enzyme for their replication. In contrast, the Avsunviroidae are still active hammerhead ribozymes. Thus, inside the nucleus of a host cell, the enzymatic RNA function can become unnecessary. Not genes, but a function, the catalytic activity, gets lost.
Viroids did apparently not gain genes but cooperated for a more complex lifestyle. For example, Carnation small viroid-like RNA (CarSV RNA) cooperates with a retrovirus and is accompanied by a homologous DNA generated by a reverse transcriptase. This enzyme presumably originates from a pararetrovirus of plants. Pararetroviruses package virus particles at a different stage during replication than retroviruses, the DNA, not the RNA. This unique combination between two viral elements has so far only been detected with CarSV in carnation flowers (Flores et al., 2005 (Flores et al., , 2014 . Why did such a cooperation evolve -perhaps by breeding gardeners? RNA is sensitive to degradation; therefore, genetic increase and growth of the genome may not be favorable energetically -at least not in plants. Gain of function is, in this case, cooperation.
The circular RNA (circRNA) is related to ribozymes/viroids as a chief regulator of other regulatory RNAs, a "sponge" absorbing small RNAs. Micro RNAs (miRNAs) are post-transcriptional regulators that are affected by the presence of circRNAs. circRNAs were detected in human and mouse brains and testes as well as in plants. They can bind 70 conserved miRNAs in a cell and amount up to 25,000 molecules (Hansen et al., 2013) . Their structure is reminiscent of catalytically active ribozymes.
There is an exceptional viroid that gained coding information and entered the human liver (Taylor, 2009) . The viroid is known as hepatitis delta virus (HDV). It has the smallest genome of any known animal virus of about 1,680 nucleotides. It has properties typical of viroids, since it contains circRNA, forms similar hairpin-loops and replicates in the nucleus using host enzymes. Two polymerases have to redirect their specificity from DNA to RNA to generate the HDV genome and antigenome. Both of them have ribozyme activity. In contrast to other ribozymes, HDV encodes a protein, the hepatitis delta antigen (HDVAg) that occurs in two forms, the small-HDVAg (24 kDa) supporting replication and the large-HDVAg (27 kDa) that helps virion assembly. The gene was presumably picked up from the host cell by recombination of HDV's mRNA intermediate with a host mRNA. Transmission depends on a helper virus, the Hepatitis B virus (HBV), which delivers the coat (Taylor, 2009 ) Does packaging by a helper virus protect the genome and thereby allow for a larger viroid to exist?
In plants, viroids may not be able to become bigger possibly due to their sensitivity to degradation -but they cannot become much smaller either. Only a single viroid is known that is completely composed of protein-coding RNA with triplets (AbouHaidar et al., 2014). Viroids and related replicating RNAs are error-prone replicating units and the error frequency imposes a certain minimal size onto them, as they would otherwise become extinct. This mechanism has been described as "error catastrophe, " which prevents survival (Eigen, 1971 (Eigen, , 2013 . The viroids and related RNAs are the smallest known replicons. Smaller ones would become extinct in the absence of repair systems.
In summary, RNA can catalyze many reactions. Protein enzymes which may have evolved later have higher catalytic activities. Ribozymes are carriers of information, but do not require coding genes. Information is stored in their sequence and structure. Thus, replication of an initial RNA is followed by flow of information, from DNA to RNA to protein, as described the Central Dogma (Crick, 1968) . Even an information flow from protein to DNA has been described for some archaeal proteins (Béguin et al., 2015) . The DNA-protein world contains numerous ncRNAs with key functions. ncRNA may serve as a model compound for the origin of life on other planets. Hereby not the chemical composition of this molecule is of prime relevance, but its simplicity and multifunctionality. Furthermore, RNA is software and hardware in a single molecule, which makes it unique in our world. There are other scenarios besides the here discussed "virus-first, " such as "protein-first", "metabolism-fist" or the "lipid world" (Segré et al., 2001; Andras and Andras, 2005; Vasas et al., 2010; Moelling, 2012) . Some of these alternative concepts were built on phylogenomics, the reconstruction of the tree of life by genome sequencing (Delsuc et al., 2005) . Surprisingly, it was Sir Francis Crick, one of the discoverers of the DNA double-helix, who stated that he would not be surprised about a world completely built of RNA. A similar prediction was made by Walter Gilbert (Crick, 1968; Gilbert, 1986) . What a vision! Our world was almost 50 years later defined as "RNAprotein" world (Altman, 2013) . One can speculate our world was built of ribozymes or viroids, which means "viruses first."
ncRNAs appear as relics from the past RNA world, before DNA, the genetic code and proteins evolved. However, ncRNA is essential in our biological DNA world today. It is possible to produce such ncRNA today in the test tube by loss of genic information from protein-coding RNA. This reduction to ncRNA was demonstrated in vitro with phage RNA. Phage Qβ genomic RNA, 4,217 nucleotides in length, was incubated in the presence of Qβ replicase, free nucleotides and salts, a rich milieu in the test tube. The RNA was allowed to replicate by means of the Qβ replicase. Serial transfer of aliquots to fresh medium led to ever faster replication rates and reduction of genomic size, down to 218 nucleotides of ncRNA in 74 generations. This study demonstrated that, depending on environmental conditions, an extreme gene reduction can take place. This experiment performed in 1965 was designated as "Spiegelman's Monster." Coding RNA became replicating ncRNA (Spiegelman et al., 1965; Kacian et al., 1972) ! Manfred Eigen extended this experiment and demonstrated further that a mixture containing no RNA to start with but only ribonucleotides and the Qβ replicase can under the right conditions in a test tube spontaneously generate self-replicating ncRNA. This evolved into a form similar to Spiegelman's Monster. The presence of the replicase enzyme was still necessary in these studies. Furthermore, a change in enzyme concentration and addition of short RNAs or an RNA intercalator influenced the arising RNA population (Sumper and Luce, 1975; Eigen, 2013) . Thus, the complexity of genomes depends on the environment: poor conditions lead to increased complexity and rich environments to reduced complexity.
The process demonstrated in this experiment with viral components indicates that reversion to simplicity, reduction in size, loss of genetic information and speed in replication can be major forces of life, even though this appears to be like a reversion of evolution. The experiment can perhaps be generalized from the test tube to a principle, that the most successful survivors on our planet are the viruses and microorganisms, which became the most abundant entities. Perhaps life can start from there again.
These studies raise the question of how RNA molecules can become longer, if the small polymers become smaller and smaller, replicate faster and outcompete longer ones. This may be overcome by heat flow across an open pore in submerged rocks, which concentrates replicating oligonucleotides from a constant feeding flow and selection for longer strands. This has been described for an increase from 100 to 1,000 nucleotides in vitro. RNA molecules shorter than 75 nucleotides will die out (Kreysing et al., 2015) . Could a poor environment lead to an increase of complexity? This could be tested. Ribozymes were shown to grow in size by uptake of genes, as demonstrated for HDV (Taylor, 2009 ).
An interesting recent unexpected example supporting the notion that environmental conditions influence genetic complexity, is the human gut microbiome. Its complexity increases with diverse food, while uniform rich food reduces its diversity and may lead to diseases such as obesity. Colonization of the human intestinal tract starts at birth. A few dozen bacterial and viral/phage species are conserved between individuals (core sequences) as a stable composition (Broecker et al., 2016c . Dysbiosis has been observed in several chronic diseases and in obesity, a loss of bacterial richness and diversity. Nutrition under affluent conditions with sugar-rich food contributes to obesity, which results in a significant reduction of the complexity of the microbiome. This reduction is difficult to revert (Cotillard et al., 2013; Le Chatelier et al., 2013) . The gut microbiome in human patients with obesity is reminiscent of the gene reduction described in the Spiegelman's Monster experiment: reduction of genes in a rich environment.
The reduction of the complexity of the microbiome is in part attributed to the action of phages, which under such conditions, defined as stress, lyse the bacteria. Fecal microbiota transplantation can even be replaced by soluble fractions containing phages or metabolites from the donor without bacteria (Ott et al., 2017) . Analogously, the most highly complex microbiomes are found in indigenous human tribes in Africa, which live on a broad variety of different nutrients. It is a slow process, though, to increase gut microbiota complexity by diverse nutrition. The obesity-associated microbiota that survive are fitter and more difficult to counteract. Urbanization and westernization of the diet is associated with a loss of microbial biodiversity, loss of microbial organisms and genes (Segata, 2015) .
To understand the mechanism and driving force for genome reduction, deletion rates were tested by insertion of an indicator gene into the Salmonella enterica genome. The loss of the indicator gene was monitored by serial passage in rich medium. After 1,000 generations about 25% of the deletions caused increased bacterial fitness. Deletions resulted in smaller genomes with reduced or absence of DNA repair genes (Koskiniemi et al., 2012) . Gene loss conferred a higher fitness to the bacteria under these experimental conditions.
The recently discovered mimiviruses and other giant viruses are worth considering for understanding the evolution of life with respect to the contribution of viruses. Their hosts are, for example, Acanthamoeba, Chlorella, and Coccolithus algae (Emiliania huxleyi), but also corals or sponges as discussed more recently. Mimiviruses were first discovered in cooling water towers in Bradford, United Kingdom in 2003 with about 1,000 genes, most of which unrelated to previously known genes. Mimiviruses have received attention because they contain elements that were considered hallmarks of living cells, not of viruses, such as elements required for protein synthesis, tRNAs and amino acid transferases. The mimiviruses harbor these building blocks as incomplete sets not sufficient for independent protein synthesis as bacteria or archaea can perform, preventing them from leading an autonomous life (La Scola et al., 2003 Scola et al., , 2008 . They are larger than some bacteria. Giant viruses can be looked at as being on an evolutionary path toward a cellular organism. Alternatively, they may have evolved from a cellular organism by loss of genetic information (Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015) . Giant viruses have frequently taken up genes from their hosts by horizontal gene transfer (HGT) (La Scola et al., 2008; Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015; Colson et al., 2018) . A graph on genome sizes shows that mimiviruses and bacteria overlap in size, indicating a continuous transition between viruses and bacteria and between living and non-living worlds (based on Holmes, 2011) (Figure 3) . Other giant viruses, such as megaviruses, were discovered in the ocean of Chile with 1,120 genes. Most recently the Klosneuvirus was identified in the sewage of the monastery Klosterneuburg in Austria in 2017 with 1.57 million (mio) basepairs (Mitch, 2017) . Pithovirus sibericum is the largest among giant viruses discovered to date with a diameter of 1.5 microns, a genome of 470,000 bp with 467 putative genes, 1.6 microns in length, and it is presumably 30,000 years old as it was recovered from permafrost in Siberia (Legendre et al., 2014) . The smaller Pandoraviruses with 1 micron in length have five times larger genomes, 2,500,000 bp (Philippe et al., 2013) (Figure 3) .
The giant viruses can even be hosts to smaller viruses, the virophages, reminiscent of bacteriophages, the viruses of bacteria. These virophages such as Sputnik are only 50 nm in size with 18,343 bp of circular dsDNA and 21 predicted proteincoding genes. They replicate in viral factories and consume the resources of the mimivirus, thereby destroying it. Some, virophages can even integrate into the genome of the cellular host and can be reactivated when the host is infected by giant viruses. Thus, giant viruses suggest that viruses are close to living entities or may have been alive (La Scola et al., 2008; Fischer and Hackl, 2016) . In biology it is common to distinguish between living and dead matter by the ability to synthesize proteins and replicate autonomously. The giant viruses may be considered as missing link between the two, because they harbor "almost" the protein synthesis apparatus. The transition from living to the non-living world is continuous, not separated by a sharp borderline (Figure 3) .
Viruses are not considered alive by most of the scientific community and as written in textbooks, because they cannot replicate autonomously. Yet some of the giant viruses are equipped with almost all components of the protein synthesis machinery close to bacteria suggesting that they belong to the living matter (Schulz et al., 2017) . The ribozymes may have been the earliest replicating entity. Perhaps also other viruses were initially more independent of the early Earth than they are today. As described in Figure 1 there may have been initially no major difference between an early virus or an early cell. Only later viruses may have given up their autonomous replication and became parasites -as has been described for some bacteria (see below).
Efforts have been made to identify the smallest living cell that is still autonomously replicating. Among the presumably smallest naturally occurring bacteria is Pelagibacter ubique of the SAR11 clade of bacteria (Giovannoni, 2017) , which was discovered in 1990. It is an alpha-proteobacterium with 1,389 genes present ubiquitously in all oceans. It can reach up to 10 28 free living cells in total and represents about 25% of microbial plankton cells. Very little of its DNA is non-coding. It harbors podophage-type phages, designated as "pelagiphage" (Zhao et al., 2013) . This small bacterium was designated as the most common organism on the planet. Why is it so successful? This autonomous bacterium is smaller than some parasitic giant viruses. Craig Venter, who first succeeded in sequencing the human genome, tried to minimize the putative smallest genome of a living species, from Mycoplasma mycoides, a parasitic bacterium that lives in ruminants (Gibson et al., 2008 (Gibson et al., , 2010 . His group synthesized a genome of 531,000 bp with 473 genes, 149 of them (32%) with unknown functions (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Among the smallest parasitic living organisms is Nanoarchaeum equitans. It is a thermophile archaeon which lives at 80 • C and at pH 6 with 2% salt (Huber et al., 2003) . Its genome has a size of 490,000 bp and encodes 540 genes. N. equitans is an obligate symbiont of a bigger archaeon, Ignicoccus riding on it as on a horse, hence the name (Huber et al., 2003) .
The world of viruses covers a range of three logs in size of their genomes: from zero genes to about 2,500 genes amounting to about 2,500,000 bp of DNA. The zero-gene viroids are about 300 bases in length (Figure 3) .
The virosphere is the most successful reservoir of biological entities on our planet in terms of numbers of particles, speed of replication, growth rates, and sequence space. There are about 10 33 viruses on our planet and they are present in every single existing species (Suttle, 2005) .
There is no living species without viruses! Viruses also occur freely in the oceans, in the soil, in clouds up to the stratosphere and higher, to at least 300 km in altitude. They populate the human intestine, birth canal, and the outside of the body as protective layer against microbial populations. Microbes contain phages that are activated during stress conditions such as lack of nutrients, change in temperatures, lack of space and other changes of environmental conditions.
One of the most earth-shaking papers of this century was the publication of the human genome sequence (Lander et al., 2001) . About half, possibly even two-thirds of the sequence are composed of more or less complete endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) and related retroelements (REs) (de Koning et al., 2011) . REs amplify via copy-and-paste mechanisms involving a reverse transcriptase step from an RNA intermediate into DNA. In addition, DNA transposable elements (TEs) move by a cutand-paste mechanism. The origin of REs is being discussed as remnants of ancient retroviral germline infections that became evolutionarily fixed in the genome. About 450,000 human ERV (HERV) elements constitute about 8% of the human genome consisting of hallmark retroviral elements like the gag, pol, env genes and flanking long terminal repeats (LTR) that act as promoters (Lander et al., 2001) . Howard Temin, one of the discoverers of the reverse transcriptase, in 1985 already described endogenous retrovirus-like elements, which he estimated to about 10% of the human and mouse genome sequence (Temin, 1985) . The actual number is about 45% as estimated today (Lander et al., 2001) . In some genes such as the Protein Kinase Inhibitor B (PKIB) gene we determined about 70% retrovirusrelated sequences (Moelling and Broecker, 2015) . Is there a limit? Could it have been 100%? Retroviruses are estimated to have entered the lineage of the mammalian genome 550 million years ago (MYA) (Hayward, 2017) . Older ERV sequences may exist but are unrecognizable today due to the accumulation of mutations.
ERVs undergo mutations, deletions or homologous recombination events with large deletions and can become as short as solo LTR elements, which are a few hundred bp in length -the left-overs from full-length retroviral genomes of about 10,000 bp. The LTR promoters can deregulate neighboring genes. Homologous recombination events may be considered as gene loss or gene reduction events. It is the assumption that the ERVs, which were no longer needed for host cell defense, were no longer selected for by evolution and consequently deleted as unnecessary consumers of energy.
Eugene Koonin points out that infection and integration are unique events occurring at a fast pace, while loss and gene reduction may take much longer time frames (Wolf and Koonin, 2013) .
A frequent gene reduction of eukaryotic genomes is the loss of the viral envelope protein encoded by the env gene. Without a coat, retroviruses can no longer leave the cell and infect other cells. They lose mobility and become obligatory intracellular elements. Helper viruses can supply envelope proteins in trans and mobilize the viruses. TEs or REs can be regarded as examples of coat-free intracellular virus relics -or could it have been the other way round, perhaps precursors of full-length retroviruses?
These elements can be amplified intracellularly and modify the host genomes by integration with the potential danger of gene disruption and genetic changes. REs can lead to gene duplications and pseudogene development, with one copy for stable conservation of acquired functions and the other one for innovations (Cotton and Page, 2005) . Such duplications constitute large amounts of mammalian genomes (Zhang, 2003) . Retroviruses have an RNase H moiety duplication, one of which serves as a catalytically inactive linker between the RT polymerase and the enzymatically active RNase H (Xiong and Eickbush, 1990; Malik and Eickbush, 2001; Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) . This gene duplication dates back to 500 mio years (Cotton and Page, 2005) .
Gene duplications are a common cause of cancer, which often occurs only in the genome of the cancer cell itself, less affecting offsprings. Myc, Myb, ErbB2, Ras, and Raf are oncogenes amplified in diverse types of human cancers (Vogelstein and Kinzler, 2002) . The ability of retroviruses to integrate makes them distinct from endosymbionts which stay separate. Yet the net result is very similar, acquisition of new genetic information, which is transmitted to the next generation, if the germline is infected and endogenization of the virus occurred.
Viral integration is not limited to eukaryotic cells but also a mechanism in prokaryotes for maintenance of the lysogenic state of phages inside bacteria.
Also, for other eukaryotic viruses such as HBV, the envelope surface antigen BHsAg can be deleted, which leads to an obligatory intracellular life style for the virus, which especially in the presence of HCV promotes cancer (Yang et al., 2016) .
HIV has been shown to rapidly lose one of its auxiliary genes, nef, originally for negative factor. The gene was lost within a rather low number of passages of the virus grown under tissue culture conditions by selection for high virus titer producing cells. Deletion of nef resulted in a significant increase of the virus titer in culture -hence the name. The nef gene product was of no need inside tissue culture cells, rather it was inhibitory for replication. However, it is essential for pathogenicity in animals, and subsequently nef was reinterpreted as "necessary factor" (Flint, 2015) .
Also, the human hosts of HIV can lose a significant terminal portion of a seven transmembrane receptor in lymphocytes, the primary target cell for HIV entry and for virus uptake. This molecule, the CCR5 cytokine receptor is truncated by 32 carboxy-terminal amino acids (CCR5-32), disabling the receptor functionally. The allele frequency of the mutant CCR5-32 mutant is about 10% in the European population, making these people resistant to HIV infections (Solloch et al., 2017) . This gene loss in Europeans has been shown to make the individuals resistant not only against HIV infection but also against malaria. This may have been the selective pressure in the past before HIV/AIDS arose. No side effect for humans lacking this gene has been described (Galvani and Slatkin, 2003) .
Viruses have been proven to be drivers of evolution (Villarreal and Witzany, 2010) , including the human genome, which by at least 45% is composed of sequences related to retroviruses. In addition, endogenized retroviruses supplied the syncytin genes that are essential for the development of the mammalian placenta, and allowed the growth of embryos without its rejection by the maternal immune system (Dupressoir et al., 2012) . Thus, the same property which causes immunodeficiency in HIV-infected patients and leads to AIDS causes syncytia formation, cell fusion after infection by a retrovirus. Viruses have also been proposed to be at the origin of the evolution of adaptive immunity (Villarreal, 2009 ). Thus, viruses shaped genomes by supplying essential genes and mechanisms.
Endogenization of retroviruses has occurred in the mammalian genomes for at least 550 mio years (Hayward, 2017) . If the integrated ERVs did not provide any selective advantage, they deteriorated and accumulated mutations with loss of function. This was directly proven by reconstruction of an infectious retrovirus from the consensus sequence of 9 defective endogenous virus sequences, designated as Phoenix. The virus was expressed from a constructed synthetic DNA clone in cell culture and formed virus particles identified by high resolution microscopic analysis (Dewannieux and Heidmann, 2013) .
The koalas in Australia are currently undergoing endogenization of a retrovirus (koala retrovirus, KoRV) in "real time" and demonstrate possible consequences for immunity. In the early 1900s, some individuals were transferred to islands, including Kangaroo Island, close to the Australian mainland for repopulation purposes, as koalas were threatened to become extinct. Today, the majority of the koala population is infected by KoRV, which is closely related to the Gibbon ape leukemia virus (GALV). Yet, koalas isolated on Kangaroo Island are KoRV negative, which allows dating the introduction of KoRV into the koala population to about one hundred years ago. Many of the infected koalas fell ill and died, yet some populations became resistant within about 100 years, corresponding to about 10 generations. The koalas likely developed resistance due to the integrated DNA proviruses. The retrovirus is transmitted as exogenous as well as endogenous virus, similar to the Jaagsiekte sheep retrovirus (JSRV), whereby the endogenized viruses protect with a viral gene product, such as Env, against de novo infections by "superinfection exclusion" (Tarlinton, 2012) . The contribution of retroviruses to the antiviral defense is striking, since all retroviral genes have analogous genes in the siRNA/RNAi defense mechanism of eukaryotic cells (Moelling et al., 2006) .
Retroviruses can protect against infection by other related viruses, for example, by expressing Env proteins that block cellsurface receptors (Villarreal, 2011) . A comparable mechanism protects bacterial cells against DNA phages, by integrated phage DNA fragments that are transcribed into mRNA and hybridize to incoming new DNA phages and thereby lead to their destruction by hybrid-specific nucleases, CRISPR/Cas immunity (Charpentier and Doudna, 2013) . It is often not realized that immunity acquisition in bacteria and mammalian cells follow analogous mechanisms (Figure 4) .
Integration of retroviruses normally occurs in somatic cells after infection as an obligatory step during the viral life cycle. Infection of germline cells can lead to transmission to the next generation and ultimately result in inherited resistance. Endogenized retroviruses likely caused resistance FIGURE 4 | Viruses protect against viruses: retroviruses protect a cell against a new infection by a similar virus designated as "superinfection exclusion" or viral interference. This is mediated by viral gene products such as proteins or nucleic acids. Similarly, phages protect against phages: superinfection of bacteria is prevented by CRISPR/Cas RNA originating from previous infections. The mechanisms of defense against viruses and phages are analogous. Protection by viruses or phages against superinfections represents cellular defense and acquired immunity. The four examples are discussed in the text.
to the exogenous counterparts. Similarly, resistance to Simian Immune Deficiency virus (SIV) in some monkey species may be explained by endogenization (Li et al., 2017 (Li et al., , 2018 . In the case of phages and their prokaryotic hosts the mechanism is described as CRISPR/Cas, which follow analogous principles of "endogenization" of incoming genetic material for subsequent exclusion.
One may speculate that HIV may also eventually become endogenized into the human genome. There is some evidence that HIV can infect human germline cells and can be transmitted to the embryonic genome (Wang et al., 2011) . How long this may take is not known -10 generations?
The loss of function of ERVs can occur by mutations, deletions of the env or other genes and ultimately all coding genes by homologous recombination, leaving behind only one LTR. The number of retrovirus-like elements add up to about 450,000, corresponding to 8% of the human genome (Lander et al., 2001; Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). The promoter regions were analyzed for their contribution to cancer by activating neighboring genes -as a consequence of a former retrovirus infection. Indeed, activated cellular genes by "downstream promotion" were identified in animal studies with activation of the myc gene as one of many examples, leading to chronic, not acute development of cancer (Ott et al., 2013) . As a general mechanism for human cancer today the LTRs are, however, not identified as a major culprit. Most of the ERVs we find today have been integrated during evolution in introns or other regions where their presence is relatively harmless. Did the other ones result in death of the carriers which disappeared? The effects of LTRs on the expression levels of neighboring host genes was studied with the endogenous human virus, HERV-K, as a possible cause of cancer, but this appears not to be a general phenomenon (Broecker et al., 2016b) . As shown for the koalas, ERVs can confer immunity to viral infections (Feschotte and Gilbert, 2012) .
A related ERV, HERV-H, was shown to produce an RNA that keeps early embryonic cells pluripotent and even revert adult cells to regain pluripotency (Grow et al., 2015) . Thus, the role of ERVs may be more complex than we presently know.
Transposable elements and REs that lost the ability of cellular transmission by deletion of the coat protein majorly contribute to genetic complexity of host cells. They are "locked" inside the cells and are major drivers of the increase of genetic complexity (Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). One could speculate that these intracellular elements are replicationincompetent retroviruses lacking coats (Lander et al., 2001) . Bats transmit viruses such as Ebola and SARS coronavirus without suffering from disease (Beltz, 2018) . Even RNA viruses such as Bornaviruses have been shown to integrate by illegitimate reverse transcription, possibly also supplying immunity against superinfection (Katzourakis and Gifford, 2010) .
There are two prominent events that significantly contributed to the success of life and the formation of cells. Both of them are associated with gene reduction. This phenomenon may play a role for the evolution of viruses from autonomous to parasitic lifestyles. In the 1960s Lynn Margulis proposed an extracellular origin for mitochondria (Margulis, 1970 (Margulis, , 1993 ). An ancestral cell, perhaps an archaeon, was infected by an anaerobic bacterium, which gave rise to mitochondria. Similarly, cyanobacteria formed the chloroplasts in modern plant cells. Mitochondria arose around 1.45 billion years ago (BYA) (Embley and Martin, 2006) . Mitochondria and chloroplasts are the most striking examples for a change in lifestyle from autonomous bacteria to endosymbionts. This transition is often considered as extremely rare and a hallmark of evolution of life on our planet. However, there are many other obligate intracellular parasites such as Rickettsia, Chlamydia trachomatis, Coxiella burnetii (the causative agent of Q fever), Mycobacterium leprae, M. tuberculosis, and M. mycoides (Beare et al., 2006) .
The change of lifestyle of the endosymbionts in the two cases of mitochondria and chloroplasts is striking. Both of them drastically reduced their genetic make-up. Mitochondria contain less than 37 genes, left from the original about 3,000 genes. Is endogenization of retroviruses, the ERVs, which are integrated into germline cells, related to endosymbiosis? Are these endosymbionts models for the transition from autonomous lifestyle to a parasitic life-which may have taken place with viruses? A more recent typical example for a reductive evolution are Rickettsia. These bacteria were assumed for some time to be viruses because of their obligatory intracellular parasitic existence. Rickettsia have evolved from autonomously replicating bacteria. Reductive evolution of endosymbionts can yield bacteria with tiny genomes on the expense of autonomous extracellular life. Their genomes are 1.11 mio bp in length with about 834 protein-coding genes, and loss of 24% by reductive evolution (Ogata et al., 2001) . Rickettsia may have some relationship with cyanobacteria, which are considered as the major symbionts.
Can one speculate that viruses may have been autonomous entities initially? Viroids may have undergone transition from autonomy to parasites, just as shown for mitochondria, chloroplasts or Rickettsia? To which extent have viruses been autonomous and independent of cellular metabolisms originally -and contributed to the origin of cells? Could they only later have lost their autonomy and become parasitic?
Viruses are minimalistic in their composition and must have undergone stringent gene reductions (Flint, 2015) . How small can their genomes become? Most coding RNA viruses still contain regulatory elements, ncRNA at the 3 and 5 terminal regions for ribosomal entry, protein synthesis, transcriptional regulation, and others.
A subgroup of retroviruses is an interesting example in respect to simultaneous loss and gain of genetic information. The oncogenic retroviruses or tumorviruses can recombine with cellular genes which under the promoters of retroviruses can become oncogenes and drivers of cancer. About a hundred oncogenes have been selected for in the laboratories and studied over decades for understanding the molecular mechanisms of cancer. Selection for growth advantages of the host cells led to the discovery of the fastest growth-promoting oncogenes we know today, such as Ras, Raf, ErbB or Myc, which are in part successful targets for anticancer drugs (Moelling et al., 1984) .
These oncogenes were in most cases taken up by the retroviruses at the expense of structural (gag), replicating (pol) or envelope (env) genes, and are often expressed as fusion proteins with Gag. Thus, oncogenic retroviruses are obligatory intracellular defective viruses and were selected for in the laboratory by researchers for the oncogenes with the most potent growth promoting ability. They need the supply of replicatory genes in trans from co-infecting helper viruses to infect other cells (Flint, 2015) . Retroviruses are able to pick up cellular genes, transfer and integrate them into neighboring cells. Some strains of Rous sarcoma virus maintain replication competent when carrying the cell-derived src (for sarcoma) oncogene encoding a protein of 536 amino acids that apparently can fit into the retroviral particle along with the full-size viral genome (Broecker et al., 2016a) . Spatial reasons may have influenced the formation of oncogenic retroviruses and limited their size and thereby led to their defective phenotypes.
There are indications that the uncontrolled activity of (retro)transposons in germline cells can result in diseases such as male infertility -presumably by "error catastrophe, " caused by too many transposition events. In mammals, piRNAs tame transposon activity by means of the RNase H activity of PIWI proteins during spermatogenesis (Girard et al., 2006) .
Only a minority of viruses are pathogens; most of them do not cause diseases. On the contrary, they are most important as drivers of evolution, as transmitters of genetic material, as innovative agents. In particular, the RNA viruses are the most innovative ones. Some of them are pathogenic and dangerous, such as HIV or influenza virus, or viroids in plants. RNA viruses are able to change so rapidly that the host immune system is unable to counteract the infection. Pathogenicity arises when environmental conditions change, for instance, when a virus enters a new organism or species.
Increase of cellular complexity by viruses is an important feature of evolution. Such major evolutionary changes are recently taken as arguments against the evolutionary theory by Charles Darwin who considered gradual changes, small increments by mutations as the main basis for selection and evolution. New criticism is addressing this thinking, considering larger changes as evolutionary drivers. Such changes arise by many complex phenomena such as endosymbiosis, infection by prokaryotes, viruses and fungi, recombination of genes, HGT, infections, sex. Dramatic changes such as endosymbiosis or pathogen infections extend Darwin's concept of evolution.
There are numerous examples for the contribution of viruses to the evolution of life since at least as long as 550 MYA (Hayward, 2017) . But genetic noise through random mutations does not allow us to go back to the origin of life. It may not be impossible that the earliest compartment was indistinguishable, either a pre-cell or a pre-virus. By analogy one may speculate that at some point autonomous viruses gave up independence for an obligatory intracellular life -as has been described for mitochondria and chloroplasts but also intracellular bacteria such as Rickettsia. This speculation is based on the concept that early life must have started simple and with high genetic variability and then became more complex. But complexity can be given up for a less energy consuming lifestyle with small genomes and high speed of replication (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . Therefore, the question may be repeated: "Are viruses our oldest ancestors?" Some fossil life can be partially reproduced in vitro by Spiegelman's Monster and Eigen's follow-up experiments, explaining the great surviving potential of simple ncRNA.
Viruses can be pathogens, but their recognition as primarily causing diseases is wrong. This notion is based on the history of viruses in medicine, as explained in a book entitled "Viruses: More Friends Than Foes" (Moelling, 2017) . The scenario described here focuses on viruses as drivers of evolution.
The early RNA world gained interest 20-30 years ago as evidenced by the references provided above. Surprisingly, there are scientists who still believe in the "pansperm hypothesis" and think that retroviruses are of extraterrestric origin (Steele et al., 2018) . The recent interest in the origin of life arose from the newly discovered exoplanets whose number increases daily -and which may be as numerous as 10 25 . Thus, pure statistics make some people believe that there is extraterrestrial life.
The extraterrestric life is mimicked in laboratories on Earth with many assumptions -perhaps this overview stimulates some thinking. The discussion presented here should be taken as concept about simple replicating and evolving entities possibly arising from different building blocks in other environments, with structure being more relevant than sequence. | What do ribozymes consist of? | 1,184 | circular single-stranded RNAs | 3,946 |
1,690 | Viruses and Evolution – Viruses First? A Personal Perspective
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433886/
SHA: f3b9fc0f8e0a431366196d3e835e1ec368b379d1
Authors: Moelling, Karin; Broecker, Felix
Date: 2019-03-19
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00523
License: cc-by
Abstract: The discovery of exoplanets within putative habitable zones revolutionized astrobiology in recent years. It stimulated interest in the question about the origin of life and its evolution. Here, we discuss what the roles of viruses might have been at the beginning of life and during evolution. Viruses are the most abundant biological entities on Earth. They are present everywhere, in our surrounding, the oceans, the soil and in every living being. Retroviruses contributed to about half of our genomic sequences and to the evolution of the mammalian placenta. Contemporary viruses reflect evolution ranging from the RNA world to the DNA-protein world. How far back can we trace their contribution? Earliest replicating and evolving entities are the ribozymes or viroids fulfilling several criteria of life. RNA can perform many aspects of life and influences our gene expression until today. The simplest structures with non-protein-coding information may represent models of life built on structural, not genetic information. Viruses today are obligatory parasites depending on host cells. Examples of how an independent lifestyle might have been lost include mitochondria, chloroplasts, Rickettsia and others, which used to be autonomous bacteria and became intracellular parasites or endosymbionts, thereby losing most of their genes. Even in vitro the loss of genes can be recapitulated all the way from coding to non-coding RNA. Furthermore, the giant viruses may indicate that there is no sharp border between living and non-living entities but an evolutionary continuum. Here, it is discussed how viruses can lose and gain genes, and that they are essential drivers of evolution. This discussion may stimulate the thinking about viruses as early possible forms of life. Apart from our view “viruses first”, there are others such as “proteins first” and “metabolism first.”
Text: Mycoplasma mycoides by systematic deletion of individual genes resulted in a synthetic minimal genome of 473 genes (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Can one consider simpler living entities?
There are elements with zero genes that fulfill many criteria for early life: ribozymes, catalytic RNAs closely related to viroids. They were recovered in vitro from 10 15 molecules (aptamers), 220 nucleotides in length, by 10 rounds of selection. Among the many RNA species present in this collection of quasispecies RNAs were catalytically active members, enzymatically active ribozymes. The sequence space for 220-mer RNAs is about 3 × 10 132 (Eigen, 1971; Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Brackett and Dieckmann, 2006) .
The selected ribozymes were able to replicate, cleave, join, and form peptide bonds. They can polymerize progeny chemically, allow for mutations to occur and can evolve. One molecule serves as catalyst, the other one as substrate. Replication of ribozymes was demonstrated in the test tube (Lincoln and Joyce, 2009) . Ribozymes can form peptide bonds between amino acids (Zhang and Cech, 1997) . Thus, small peptides were available by ribozyme activity. Consequently, an RNA modification has been proposed as peptide nucleic acid (PNA), with more stable peptide bonds instead of phosphodiester bonds (Zhang and Cech, 1997; Joyce, 2002) . Replication of RNA molecules can be performed chemically from RNA without polymerase enzymes. In addition, deoxyribozymes can form from ribonucleotides (Wilson and Szostak, 1999) . Thus, DNA can arise from RNA chemically, without the key protein enzyme, the reverse transcriptase.
An entire living world is possible from non-coding RNA (ncRNA) before evolution of the genetic code and protein enzymes. Ribozymes naturally consist of circular single-stranded RNAs (Orgel, 2004) . They lack the genetic triplet code and do not encode proteins. Instead, they exhibit structural information by hairpin-loops that form hydrogen bonds between incomplete double strands, and loops free to interact with other molecules. They represent a quasispecies in which many species of RNA may form, such as ribozymes, tRNA-like molecules, and other ncRNAs. RNAs within such a pool can bind amino acids. Ninety different amino acids have been identified on the Murchison meteorite found in Australia, while on Earth only about 20 of them are used for protein synthesis (Meierhenrich, 2008) . Where formation of ribozymes occurred on the early Earth is a matter of speculation. The hydrothermal vents such as black smokers in the deep ocean are possibilities where life may have started (Martin et al., 2008) . There, temperature gradients and clay containing minerals such as magnesium or manganese are available. Pores or niches offer possibilities for concentration of building blocks, which is required for chemical reactions to occur. Interestingly, also ice is a candidate for ribozyme formation and chemical reactions. Ice crystals displace the biomolecules into the liquid phase, which leads to concentration, creating a quasicellular compartmentalization where de novo synthesis of nucleotide precursors is promoted. There, RNA and ribozymes can emerge, which are capable of self-replication (Attwater et al., 2010) .
tRNA-amino acid complexes can find RNAs as "mRNAs." Such interactions could have contributed to the evolution of the genetic code. This sequence of events can lead to primitive ribosome precursors. Ribozymes are the essential catalytic elements in ribosomes: "The ribosome is a ribozyme" (Cech, 2000) , supplemented with about a hundred scaffold proteins later during evolution. The proteins have structural functions and contribute indirectly to enzymatic activity. Are these ribosomebound ribozymes fossils from the early Earth? Small peptides can be formed by ribozymes before ribosomes evolved, whereby single or dimeric amino acids may originate from the universe (Meierhenrich, 2008) .
Small peptides with basic amino acids can increase the catalytic activity of ribozymes as shown in vitro (Müller et al., 1994) . Such proteins are known as RNA-binding proteins from RNA viruses that protect the RNA genome, with motifs such as RAPRKKG of the nucleocapsid NCp7 of HIV (Schmalzbauer et al., 1996) . Peptides can enhance the catalytic activity of ribozymes up to a 100-fold (Müller et al., 1994) . Such peptides of RNA viruses serve as chaperones that remove higher ordered RNA structures, allowing for more efficient interaction of RNA molecules and increasing transcription rates of RNA polymerases (Müller et al., 1994) . Ribonucleoproteins may have also been functionally important during the evolution of ribosomes (Harish and Caetano-Anolles, 2012) .
These pre-ribosomal structures are also similar to precursorlike structures of retroviruses. Reverse transcription can be performed by ribozymes chemically. This action does not necessarily require a protein polymerase such as the reverse transcriptase. Similarly, deoxyribonucleotides can arise by removal of an oxygen without the need of a protein enzyme (a reductase) as today, and allow for DNA polymerization (Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Joyce, 2002) . The same elements of the precursors for ribosomes are also building blocks of retroviruses, which may have a similar evolutionary origin (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . tRNAs serve as primers for the reverse transcriptase, and the sequence of promoters of transposable elements are derived from tRNAs (Lander et al., 2001) . The ribozymes developed into more complex self-cleaving group II introns with insertion of genes encoding a reverse transcriptase and additional proteins (Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) (Figure 1) .
It came as a surprise that the genomes of almost all species are rich in ncDNA, transcribed into ncRNAs but not encoding proteins, as evidenced, for instance, by the "Encyclopedia of DNA Elements" (ENCODE) project. ncDNA amounts to more than 98% of the human DNA genome (Deveson et al., 2017) . Higher organisms tend to have more non-coding information, which allows for more complex modes of gene regulation. The ncRNAs are regulators of the protein-coding sequences. Highly complex organisms such as humans typically have a high number of ncRNA and regulatory mechanisms. ncRNA can range from close to zero in the smallest bacteria such as Pelagibacter ubique to about 98% in the human genome.
RNA viruses such as the retrovirus HIV harbor ncRNAs for gene regulation such as the trans-activating response element (TAR), the binding site for the Tat protein for early viral gene expression. Tat has a highly basic domain comprising mostly Lys and Arg residues, resembling other RNA binding proteins. ncRNA also serves on viral RNA genomes as ribosomal entry sites, primer binding sites or packaging signals. DNA synthesis depends on RNA synthesis as initial event, with RNA primers as starters for DNA replication, inside of cells as FIGURE 1 | A compartment is shown with essential components of life as discussed in the text. Non-coding RNA (ncRNA), ribozymes or viroids, can perform many steps for life without protein-coding genes but only by structural information. Individual amino acids are indicated as black dots and may be available on Earth from the universe. DNA may have existed before retroviruses. The compartment can be interpreted as pre-virus or pre-cell. Viroid, green; RNA, red; DNA, black.
well as during retroviral replication, proving a requirement of RNA (Flint, 2015) .
The number of mammalian protein-coding genes is about 20,000. Surprisingly, this is only a fifth of the number of genes of bread wheat (Appels et al., 2018) . Tulips, maize and other plants also have larger genomes, indicating that the number of genes does not necessarily reflect the complexity of an organism. What makes these plant genomes so large, is still an open question. Could the giant genomes possibly be the result to breeding of plants by farmers or gardeners?
According to Szostak there are molecules which appear like relics from the RNA world such as acetyl-CoA or vitamin B12, both of which are bound to a ribonucleotide for no obvious reason -was it "forgotten" to be removed? (Roberts and Szostak, 1997; Szostak et al., 2001; Szostak, 2011) . Perhaps the connected RNA serves as structural stabilizer. Lipid vesicles could have formed the first compartments and enclosed ribozymes, tRNAs with selected amino acids, and RNA which became mRNA. Is this a pre-cell or pre-virus (Figure 1) ? Patel et al. (2015) demonstrated that the building blocks of life, ribonucleotides, lipids and amino acids, can be formed from C, H, O, P, N, S in a "one pot" synthesis. This study can be regarded as a follow-up study of the classical Urey-Miller in vitro synthesis of biomolecules (Miller, 1953; Miller and Urey, 1959) . Transition from the RNA to the DNA world was promoted by the formation of the reverse transcriptase. The enzyme was first described in retroviruses but it is almost ubiquitous and found in numerous cellular species, many of which with unknown functions (Simon and Zimmerly, 2008; Lescot et al., 2016) . It is an important link between the RNA and the DNA worlds. The name reverse transcriptase is historical and irritating because it is the "real" transcriptase during the transition from the RNA to the DNA world. Similarly, the ribonuclease H (RNase H) is an essential enzyme of retroviruses (Mölling et al., 1971) . The RNase H turned out to be one of the five most frequent and ancient proteins (Ma et al., 2008 ) that belongs to a superfamily of more than sixty different unique representatives and 152 families with numerous functions (Majorek et al., 2014) .
Some of the many tRNAs can become loaded with amino acids. There are viruses containing tRNA-like structures (TLS), resembling these early RNAs (Dreher, 2009) . The TLS of these viruses typically bind to a single amino acid. TLS-viruses include plant viruses, such as Turnip yellow mosaic virus, in Peanut clump virus, Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), and Brome mosaic virus. Only half a tRNA is found in Narnaviruses of fungi. The amino acids known to be components of tRNA-like viruses are valine, histidine and tyrosine. The structures were also designated as "mimicry, " enhancing translation (Dreher, 2009 (Dreher, , 2010 . They look like "frozen" precursor-like elements for protein synthesis. This combination of a partial tRNA linked to one amino acid can be interpreted as an evolutionary early step toward protein synthesis, trapped in a viral element.
Ribozymes are related to the protein-free viroids. Viroids are virus-like elements that belong to the virosphere, the world of viruses (Chela-Flores, 1994) . Viroids lack protein coats and therefore were initially not designated as viruses but virus-like viroids when they were discovered in 1971 by Theodor Diener. He described viroids as "living fossils" (Diener, 2016) (Figure 2) .
From infected potatoes, Diener isolated the Potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd) whose genome was about a 100-fold smaller than those of viruses known at that time. The viroids known today are ranging from 246 to 467 nucleotides. They contain circular single-stranded RNA, are protein-free and self-replicating with no genetic information, but only structural FIGURE 2 | Viroids are hairpin-loop structures and are shown schematically and as electron micrograph. Viroids are, like ribozymes, without genetic information and play major biological roles today in plant diseases, in carnation flowers, in liver cancer, as catalyst of protein synthesis in ribosomes and as circular regulatory RNAs, as "sponges" for other regulatory RNAs.
information in the form of hairpin-loops (Riesner et al., 1979) . They can generate copies of themselves in the appropriate environment. They were designated as the "frontiers of life" (Flores et al., 2014) .
The knowledge of virus composition was based on TMV and its crystallization by Wendell Stanley in 1935 (Pennazio and Roggero, 2000) . The genome of TMV is protein-coding singlestranded RNA of about 6,400 nucleotides that is enclosed by a rod-like protein coat. Viroids, in contrast, do not encode proteins and lack coats but they are closely related to viruses. Viroids can lose their autonomy and rely on host RNA polymerases to replicate, are capable of infecting plants and many are economically important pathogens. There are two families, the nucleus-replicating Pospiviroidae such as PSTVd and the chloroplast-replicating Avsunviroidae like the Avocado sunblotch viroid (ASBVd). Their replication requires host enzymes. Thus, autonomy is replaced by dependence on host enzymes and an intracellular lifestyle.
Most viroids are often enzymatically active ribozymes -yet they are examples that this trait can get lost as a result of changing environmental conditions. Loss of ribozyme activity is a functional, not a genetic loss. Only the nuclear variants, the Pospiviroidae, can lose their ribozyme activity and use the cellular RNase III enzyme for their replication. In contrast, the Avsunviroidae are still active hammerhead ribozymes. Thus, inside the nucleus of a host cell, the enzymatic RNA function can become unnecessary. Not genes, but a function, the catalytic activity, gets lost.
Viroids did apparently not gain genes but cooperated for a more complex lifestyle. For example, Carnation small viroid-like RNA (CarSV RNA) cooperates with a retrovirus and is accompanied by a homologous DNA generated by a reverse transcriptase. This enzyme presumably originates from a pararetrovirus of plants. Pararetroviruses package virus particles at a different stage during replication than retroviruses, the DNA, not the RNA. This unique combination between two viral elements has so far only been detected with CarSV in carnation flowers (Flores et al., 2005 (Flores et al., , 2014 . Why did such a cooperation evolve -perhaps by breeding gardeners? RNA is sensitive to degradation; therefore, genetic increase and growth of the genome may not be favorable energetically -at least not in plants. Gain of function is, in this case, cooperation.
The circular RNA (circRNA) is related to ribozymes/viroids as a chief regulator of other regulatory RNAs, a "sponge" absorbing small RNAs. Micro RNAs (miRNAs) are post-transcriptional regulators that are affected by the presence of circRNAs. circRNAs were detected in human and mouse brains and testes as well as in plants. They can bind 70 conserved miRNAs in a cell and amount up to 25,000 molecules (Hansen et al., 2013) . Their structure is reminiscent of catalytically active ribozymes.
There is an exceptional viroid that gained coding information and entered the human liver (Taylor, 2009) . The viroid is known as hepatitis delta virus (HDV). It has the smallest genome of any known animal virus of about 1,680 nucleotides. It has properties typical of viroids, since it contains circRNA, forms similar hairpin-loops and replicates in the nucleus using host enzymes. Two polymerases have to redirect their specificity from DNA to RNA to generate the HDV genome and antigenome. Both of them have ribozyme activity. In contrast to other ribozymes, HDV encodes a protein, the hepatitis delta antigen (HDVAg) that occurs in two forms, the small-HDVAg (24 kDa) supporting replication and the large-HDVAg (27 kDa) that helps virion assembly. The gene was presumably picked up from the host cell by recombination of HDV's mRNA intermediate with a host mRNA. Transmission depends on a helper virus, the Hepatitis B virus (HBV), which delivers the coat (Taylor, 2009 ) Does packaging by a helper virus protect the genome and thereby allow for a larger viroid to exist?
In plants, viroids may not be able to become bigger possibly due to their sensitivity to degradation -but they cannot become much smaller either. Only a single viroid is known that is completely composed of protein-coding RNA with triplets (AbouHaidar et al., 2014). Viroids and related replicating RNAs are error-prone replicating units and the error frequency imposes a certain minimal size onto them, as they would otherwise become extinct. This mechanism has been described as "error catastrophe, " which prevents survival (Eigen, 1971 (Eigen, , 2013 . The viroids and related RNAs are the smallest known replicons. Smaller ones would become extinct in the absence of repair systems.
In summary, RNA can catalyze many reactions. Protein enzymes which may have evolved later have higher catalytic activities. Ribozymes are carriers of information, but do not require coding genes. Information is stored in their sequence and structure. Thus, replication of an initial RNA is followed by flow of information, from DNA to RNA to protein, as described the Central Dogma (Crick, 1968) . Even an information flow from protein to DNA has been described for some archaeal proteins (Béguin et al., 2015) . The DNA-protein world contains numerous ncRNAs with key functions. ncRNA may serve as a model compound for the origin of life on other planets. Hereby not the chemical composition of this molecule is of prime relevance, but its simplicity and multifunctionality. Furthermore, RNA is software and hardware in a single molecule, which makes it unique in our world. There are other scenarios besides the here discussed "virus-first, " such as "protein-first", "metabolism-fist" or the "lipid world" (Segré et al., 2001; Andras and Andras, 2005; Vasas et al., 2010; Moelling, 2012) . Some of these alternative concepts were built on phylogenomics, the reconstruction of the tree of life by genome sequencing (Delsuc et al., 2005) . Surprisingly, it was Sir Francis Crick, one of the discoverers of the DNA double-helix, who stated that he would not be surprised about a world completely built of RNA. A similar prediction was made by Walter Gilbert (Crick, 1968; Gilbert, 1986) . What a vision! Our world was almost 50 years later defined as "RNAprotein" world (Altman, 2013) . One can speculate our world was built of ribozymes or viroids, which means "viruses first."
ncRNAs appear as relics from the past RNA world, before DNA, the genetic code and proteins evolved. However, ncRNA is essential in our biological DNA world today. It is possible to produce such ncRNA today in the test tube by loss of genic information from protein-coding RNA. This reduction to ncRNA was demonstrated in vitro with phage RNA. Phage Qβ genomic RNA, 4,217 nucleotides in length, was incubated in the presence of Qβ replicase, free nucleotides and salts, a rich milieu in the test tube. The RNA was allowed to replicate by means of the Qβ replicase. Serial transfer of aliquots to fresh medium led to ever faster replication rates and reduction of genomic size, down to 218 nucleotides of ncRNA in 74 generations. This study demonstrated that, depending on environmental conditions, an extreme gene reduction can take place. This experiment performed in 1965 was designated as "Spiegelman's Monster." Coding RNA became replicating ncRNA (Spiegelman et al., 1965; Kacian et al., 1972) ! Manfred Eigen extended this experiment and demonstrated further that a mixture containing no RNA to start with but only ribonucleotides and the Qβ replicase can under the right conditions in a test tube spontaneously generate self-replicating ncRNA. This evolved into a form similar to Spiegelman's Monster. The presence of the replicase enzyme was still necessary in these studies. Furthermore, a change in enzyme concentration and addition of short RNAs or an RNA intercalator influenced the arising RNA population (Sumper and Luce, 1975; Eigen, 2013) . Thus, the complexity of genomes depends on the environment: poor conditions lead to increased complexity and rich environments to reduced complexity.
The process demonstrated in this experiment with viral components indicates that reversion to simplicity, reduction in size, loss of genetic information and speed in replication can be major forces of life, even though this appears to be like a reversion of evolution. The experiment can perhaps be generalized from the test tube to a principle, that the most successful survivors on our planet are the viruses and microorganisms, which became the most abundant entities. Perhaps life can start from there again.
These studies raise the question of how RNA molecules can become longer, if the small polymers become smaller and smaller, replicate faster and outcompete longer ones. This may be overcome by heat flow across an open pore in submerged rocks, which concentrates replicating oligonucleotides from a constant feeding flow and selection for longer strands. This has been described for an increase from 100 to 1,000 nucleotides in vitro. RNA molecules shorter than 75 nucleotides will die out (Kreysing et al., 2015) . Could a poor environment lead to an increase of complexity? This could be tested. Ribozymes were shown to grow in size by uptake of genes, as demonstrated for HDV (Taylor, 2009 ).
An interesting recent unexpected example supporting the notion that environmental conditions influence genetic complexity, is the human gut microbiome. Its complexity increases with diverse food, while uniform rich food reduces its diversity and may lead to diseases such as obesity. Colonization of the human intestinal tract starts at birth. A few dozen bacterial and viral/phage species are conserved between individuals (core sequences) as a stable composition (Broecker et al., 2016c . Dysbiosis has been observed in several chronic diseases and in obesity, a loss of bacterial richness and diversity. Nutrition under affluent conditions with sugar-rich food contributes to obesity, which results in a significant reduction of the complexity of the microbiome. This reduction is difficult to revert (Cotillard et al., 2013; Le Chatelier et al., 2013) . The gut microbiome in human patients with obesity is reminiscent of the gene reduction described in the Spiegelman's Monster experiment: reduction of genes in a rich environment.
The reduction of the complexity of the microbiome is in part attributed to the action of phages, which under such conditions, defined as stress, lyse the bacteria. Fecal microbiota transplantation can even be replaced by soluble fractions containing phages or metabolites from the donor without bacteria (Ott et al., 2017) . Analogously, the most highly complex microbiomes are found in indigenous human tribes in Africa, which live on a broad variety of different nutrients. It is a slow process, though, to increase gut microbiota complexity by diverse nutrition. The obesity-associated microbiota that survive are fitter and more difficult to counteract. Urbanization and westernization of the diet is associated with a loss of microbial biodiversity, loss of microbial organisms and genes (Segata, 2015) .
To understand the mechanism and driving force for genome reduction, deletion rates were tested by insertion of an indicator gene into the Salmonella enterica genome. The loss of the indicator gene was monitored by serial passage in rich medium. After 1,000 generations about 25% of the deletions caused increased bacterial fitness. Deletions resulted in smaller genomes with reduced or absence of DNA repair genes (Koskiniemi et al., 2012) . Gene loss conferred a higher fitness to the bacteria under these experimental conditions.
The recently discovered mimiviruses and other giant viruses are worth considering for understanding the evolution of life with respect to the contribution of viruses. Their hosts are, for example, Acanthamoeba, Chlorella, and Coccolithus algae (Emiliania huxleyi), but also corals or sponges as discussed more recently. Mimiviruses were first discovered in cooling water towers in Bradford, United Kingdom in 2003 with about 1,000 genes, most of which unrelated to previously known genes. Mimiviruses have received attention because they contain elements that were considered hallmarks of living cells, not of viruses, such as elements required for protein synthesis, tRNAs and amino acid transferases. The mimiviruses harbor these building blocks as incomplete sets not sufficient for independent protein synthesis as bacteria or archaea can perform, preventing them from leading an autonomous life (La Scola et al., 2003 Scola et al., , 2008 . They are larger than some bacteria. Giant viruses can be looked at as being on an evolutionary path toward a cellular organism. Alternatively, they may have evolved from a cellular organism by loss of genetic information (Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015) . Giant viruses have frequently taken up genes from their hosts by horizontal gene transfer (HGT) (La Scola et al., 2008; Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015; Colson et al., 2018) . A graph on genome sizes shows that mimiviruses and bacteria overlap in size, indicating a continuous transition between viruses and bacteria and between living and non-living worlds (based on Holmes, 2011) (Figure 3) . Other giant viruses, such as megaviruses, were discovered in the ocean of Chile with 1,120 genes. Most recently the Klosneuvirus was identified in the sewage of the monastery Klosterneuburg in Austria in 2017 with 1.57 million (mio) basepairs (Mitch, 2017) . Pithovirus sibericum is the largest among giant viruses discovered to date with a diameter of 1.5 microns, a genome of 470,000 bp with 467 putative genes, 1.6 microns in length, and it is presumably 30,000 years old as it was recovered from permafrost in Siberia (Legendre et al., 2014) . The smaller Pandoraviruses with 1 micron in length have five times larger genomes, 2,500,000 bp (Philippe et al., 2013) (Figure 3) .
The giant viruses can even be hosts to smaller viruses, the virophages, reminiscent of bacteriophages, the viruses of bacteria. These virophages such as Sputnik are only 50 nm in size with 18,343 bp of circular dsDNA and 21 predicted proteincoding genes. They replicate in viral factories and consume the resources of the mimivirus, thereby destroying it. Some, virophages can even integrate into the genome of the cellular host and can be reactivated when the host is infected by giant viruses. Thus, giant viruses suggest that viruses are close to living entities or may have been alive (La Scola et al., 2008; Fischer and Hackl, 2016) . In biology it is common to distinguish between living and dead matter by the ability to synthesize proteins and replicate autonomously. The giant viruses may be considered as missing link between the two, because they harbor "almost" the protein synthesis apparatus. The transition from living to the non-living world is continuous, not separated by a sharp borderline (Figure 3) .
Viruses are not considered alive by most of the scientific community and as written in textbooks, because they cannot replicate autonomously. Yet some of the giant viruses are equipped with almost all components of the protein synthesis machinery close to bacteria suggesting that they belong to the living matter (Schulz et al., 2017) . The ribozymes may have been the earliest replicating entity. Perhaps also other viruses were initially more independent of the early Earth than they are today. As described in Figure 1 there may have been initially no major difference between an early virus or an early cell. Only later viruses may have given up their autonomous replication and became parasites -as has been described for some bacteria (see below).
Efforts have been made to identify the smallest living cell that is still autonomously replicating. Among the presumably smallest naturally occurring bacteria is Pelagibacter ubique of the SAR11 clade of bacteria (Giovannoni, 2017) , which was discovered in 1990. It is an alpha-proteobacterium with 1,389 genes present ubiquitously in all oceans. It can reach up to 10 28 free living cells in total and represents about 25% of microbial plankton cells. Very little of its DNA is non-coding. It harbors podophage-type phages, designated as "pelagiphage" (Zhao et al., 2013) . This small bacterium was designated as the most common organism on the planet. Why is it so successful? This autonomous bacterium is smaller than some parasitic giant viruses. Craig Venter, who first succeeded in sequencing the human genome, tried to minimize the putative smallest genome of a living species, from Mycoplasma mycoides, a parasitic bacterium that lives in ruminants (Gibson et al., 2008 (Gibson et al., , 2010 . His group synthesized a genome of 531,000 bp with 473 genes, 149 of them (32%) with unknown functions (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Among the smallest parasitic living organisms is Nanoarchaeum equitans. It is a thermophile archaeon which lives at 80 • C and at pH 6 with 2% salt (Huber et al., 2003) . Its genome has a size of 490,000 bp and encodes 540 genes. N. equitans is an obligate symbiont of a bigger archaeon, Ignicoccus riding on it as on a horse, hence the name (Huber et al., 2003) .
The world of viruses covers a range of three logs in size of their genomes: from zero genes to about 2,500 genes amounting to about 2,500,000 bp of DNA. The zero-gene viroids are about 300 bases in length (Figure 3) .
The virosphere is the most successful reservoir of biological entities on our planet in terms of numbers of particles, speed of replication, growth rates, and sequence space. There are about 10 33 viruses on our planet and they are present in every single existing species (Suttle, 2005) .
There is no living species without viruses! Viruses also occur freely in the oceans, in the soil, in clouds up to the stratosphere and higher, to at least 300 km in altitude. They populate the human intestine, birth canal, and the outside of the body as protective layer against microbial populations. Microbes contain phages that are activated during stress conditions such as lack of nutrients, change in temperatures, lack of space and other changes of environmental conditions.
One of the most earth-shaking papers of this century was the publication of the human genome sequence (Lander et al., 2001) . About half, possibly even two-thirds of the sequence are composed of more or less complete endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) and related retroelements (REs) (de Koning et al., 2011) . REs amplify via copy-and-paste mechanisms involving a reverse transcriptase step from an RNA intermediate into DNA. In addition, DNA transposable elements (TEs) move by a cutand-paste mechanism. The origin of REs is being discussed as remnants of ancient retroviral germline infections that became evolutionarily fixed in the genome. About 450,000 human ERV (HERV) elements constitute about 8% of the human genome consisting of hallmark retroviral elements like the gag, pol, env genes and flanking long terminal repeats (LTR) that act as promoters (Lander et al., 2001) . Howard Temin, one of the discoverers of the reverse transcriptase, in 1985 already described endogenous retrovirus-like elements, which he estimated to about 10% of the human and mouse genome sequence (Temin, 1985) . The actual number is about 45% as estimated today (Lander et al., 2001) . In some genes such as the Protein Kinase Inhibitor B (PKIB) gene we determined about 70% retrovirusrelated sequences (Moelling and Broecker, 2015) . Is there a limit? Could it have been 100%? Retroviruses are estimated to have entered the lineage of the mammalian genome 550 million years ago (MYA) (Hayward, 2017) . Older ERV sequences may exist but are unrecognizable today due to the accumulation of mutations.
ERVs undergo mutations, deletions or homologous recombination events with large deletions and can become as short as solo LTR elements, which are a few hundred bp in length -the left-overs from full-length retroviral genomes of about 10,000 bp. The LTR promoters can deregulate neighboring genes. Homologous recombination events may be considered as gene loss or gene reduction events. It is the assumption that the ERVs, which were no longer needed for host cell defense, were no longer selected for by evolution and consequently deleted as unnecessary consumers of energy.
Eugene Koonin points out that infection and integration are unique events occurring at a fast pace, while loss and gene reduction may take much longer time frames (Wolf and Koonin, 2013) .
A frequent gene reduction of eukaryotic genomes is the loss of the viral envelope protein encoded by the env gene. Without a coat, retroviruses can no longer leave the cell and infect other cells. They lose mobility and become obligatory intracellular elements. Helper viruses can supply envelope proteins in trans and mobilize the viruses. TEs or REs can be regarded as examples of coat-free intracellular virus relics -or could it have been the other way round, perhaps precursors of full-length retroviruses?
These elements can be amplified intracellularly and modify the host genomes by integration with the potential danger of gene disruption and genetic changes. REs can lead to gene duplications and pseudogene development, with one copy for stable conservation of acquired functions and the other one for innovations (Cotton and Page, 2005) . Such duplications constitute large amounts of mammalian genomes (Zhang, 2003) . Retroviruses have an RNase H moiety duplication, one of which serves as a catalytically inactive linker between the RT polymerase and the enzymatically active RNase H (Xiong and Eickbush, 1990; Malik and Eickbush, 2001; Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) . This gene duplication dates back to 500 mio years (Cotton and Page, 2005) .
Gene duplications are a common cause of cancer, which often occurs only in the genome of the cancer cell itself, less affecting offsprings. Myc, Myb, ErbB2, Ras, and Raf are oncogenes amplified in diverse types of human cancers (Vogelstein and Kinzler, 2002) . The ability of retroviruses to integrate makes them distinct from endosymbionts which stay separate. Yet the net result is very similar, acquisition of new genetic information, which is transmitted to the next generation, if the germline is infected and endogenization of the virus occurred.
Viral integration is not limited to eukaryotic cells but also a mechanism in prokaryotes for maintenance of the lysogenic state of phages inside bacteria.
Also, for other eukaryotic viruses such as HBV, the envelope surface antigen BHsAg can be deleted, which leads to an obligatory intracellular life style for the virus, which especially in the presence of HCV promotes cancer (Yang et al., 2016) .
HIV has been shown to rapidly lose one of its auxiliary genes, nef, originally for negative factor. The gene was lost within a rather low number of passages of the virus grown under tissue culture conditions by selection for high virus titer producing cells. Deletion of nef resulted in a significant increase of the virus titer in culture -hence the name. The nef gene product was of no need inside tissue culture cells, rather it was inhibitory for replication. However, it is essential for pathogenicity in animals, and subsequently nef was reinterpreted as "necessary factor" (Flint, 2015) .
Also, the human hosts of HIV can lose a significant terminal portion of a seven transmembrane receptor in lymphocytes, the primary target cell for HIV entry and for virus uptake. This molecule, the CCR5 cytokine receptor is truncated by 32 carboxy-terminal amino acids (CCR5-32), disabling the receptor functionally. The allele frequency of the mutant CCR5-32 mutant is about 10% in the European population, making these people resistant to HIV infections (Solloch et al., 2017) . This gene loss in Europeans has been shown to make the individuals resistant not only against HIV infection but also against malaria. This may have been the selective pressure in the past before HIV/AIDS arose. No side effect for humans lacking this gene has been described (Galvani and Slatkin, 2003) .
Viruses have been proven to be drivers of evolution (Villarreal and Witzany, 2010) , including the human genome, which by at least 45% is composed of sequences related to retroviruses. In addition, endogenized retroviruses supplied the syncytin genes that are essential for the development of the mammalian placenta, and allowed the growth of embryos without its rejection by the maternal immune system (Dupressoir et al., 2012) . Thus, the same property which causes immunodeficiency in HIV-infected patients and leads to AIDS causes syncytia formation, cell fusion after infection by a retrovirus. Viruses have also been proposed to be at the origin of the evolution of adaptive immunity (Villarreal, 2009 ). Thus, viruses shaped genomes by supplying essential genes and mechanisms.
Endogenization of retroviruses has occurred in the mammalian genomes for at least 550 mio years (Hayward, 2017) . If the integrated ERVs did not provide any selective advantage, they deteriorated and accumulated mutations with loss of function. This was directly proven by reconstruction of an infectious retrovirus from the consensus sequence of 9 defective endogenous virus sequences, designated as Phoenix. The virus was expressed from a constructed synthetic DNA clone in cell culture and formed virus particles identified by high resolution microscopic analysis (Dewannieux and Heidmann, 2013) .
The koalas in Australia are currently undergoing endogenization of a retrovirus (koala retrovirus, KoRV) in "real time" and demonstrate possible consequences for immunity. In the early 1900s, some individuals were transferred to islands, including Kangaroo Island, close to the Australian mainland for repopulation purposes, as koalas were threatened to become extinct. Today, the majority of the koala population is infected by KoRV, which is closely related to the Gibbon ape leukemia virus (GALV). Yet, koalas isolated on Kangaroo Island are KoRV negative, which allows dating the introduction of KoRV into the koala population to about one hundred years ago. Many of the infected koalas fell ill and died, yet some populations became resistant within about 100 years, corresponding to about 10 generations. The koalas likely developed resistance due to the integrated DNA proviruses. The retrovirus is transmitted as exogenous as well as endogenous virus, similar to the Jaagsiekte sheep retrovirus (JSRV), whereby the endogenized viruses protect with a viral gene product, such as Env, against de novo infections by "superinfection exclusion" (Tarlinton, 2012) . The contribution of retroviruses to the antiviral defense is striking, since all retroviral genes have analogous genes in the siRNA/RNAi defense mechanism of eukaryotic cells (Moelling et al., 2006) .
Retroviruses can protect against infection by other related viruses, for example, by expressing Env proteins that block cellsurface receptors (Villarreal, 2011) . A comparable mechanism protects bacterial cells against DNA phages, by integrated phage DNA fragments that are transcribed into mRNA and hybridize to incoming new DNA phages and thereby lead to their destruction by hybrid-specific nucleases, CRISPR/Cas immunity (Charpentier and Doudna, 2013) . It is often not realized that immunity acquisition in bacteria and mammalian cells follow analogous mechanisms (Figure 4) .
Integration of retroviruses normally occurs in somatic cells after infection as an obligatory step during the viral life cycle. Infection of germline cells can lead to transmission to the next generation and ultimately result in inherited resistance. Endogenized retroviruses likely caused resistance FIGURE 4 | Viruses protect against viruses: retroviruses protect a cell against a new infection by a similar virus designated as "superinfection exclusion" or viral interference. This is mediated by viral gene products such as proteins or nucleic acids. Similarly, phages protect against phages: superinfection of bacteria is prevented by CRISPR/Cas RNA originating from previous infections. The mechanisms of defense against viruses and phages are analogous. Protection by viruses or phages against superinfections represents cellular defense and acquired immunity. The four examples are discussed in the text.
to the exogenous counterparts. Similarly, resistance to Simian Immune Deficiency virus (SIV) in some monkey species may be explained by endogenization (Li et al., 2017 (Li et al., , 2018 . In the case of phages and their prokaryotic hosts the mechanism is described as CRISPR/Cas, which follow analogous principles of "endogenization" of incoming genetic material for subsequent exclusion.
One may speculate that HIV may also eventually become endogenized into the human genome. There is some evidence that HIV can infect human germline cells and can be transmitted to the embryonic genome (Wang et al., 2011) . How long this may take is not known -10 generations?
The loss of function of ERVs can occur by mutations, deletions of the env or other genes and ultimately all coding genes by homologous recombination, leaving behind only one LTR. The number of retrovirus-like elements add up to about 450,000, corresponding to 8% of the human genome (Lander et al., 2001; Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). The promoter regions were analyzed for their contribution to cancer by activating neighboring genes -as a consequence of a former retrovirus infection. Indeed, activated cellular genes by "downstream promotion" were identified in animal studies with activation of the myc gene as one of many examples, leading to chronic, not acute development of cancer (Ott et al., 2013) . As a general mechanism for human cancer today the LTRs are, however, not identified as a major culprit. Most of the ERVs we find today have been integrated during evolution in introns or other regions where their presence is relatively harmless. Did the other ones result in death of the carriers which disappeared? The effects of LTRs on the expression levels of neighboring host genes was studied with the endogenous human virus, HERV-K, as a possible cause of cancer, but this appears not to be a general phenomenon (Broecker et al., 2016b) . As shown for the koalas, ERVs can confer immunity to viral infections (Feschotte and Gilbert, 2012) .
A related ERV, HERV-H, was shown to produce an RNA that keeps early embryonic cells pluripotent and even revert adult cells to regain pluripotency (Grow et al., 2015) . Thus, the role of ERVs may be more complex than we presently know.
Transposable elements and REs that lost the ability of cellular transmission by deletion of the coat protein majorly contribute to genetic complexity of host cells. They are "locked" inside the cells and are major drivers of the increase of genetic complexity (Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). One could speculate that these intracellular elements are replicationincompetent retroviruses lacking coats (Lander et al., 2001) . Bats transmit viruses such as Ebola and SARS coronavirus without suffering from disease (Beltz, 2018) . Even RNA viruses such as Bornaviruses have been shown to integrate by illegitimate reverse transcription, possibly also supplying immunity against superinfection (Katzourakis and Gifford, 2010) .
There are two prominent events that significantly contributed to the success of life and the formation of cells. Both of them are associated with gene reduction. This phenomenon may play a role for the evolution of viruses from autonomous to parasitic lifestyles. In the 1960s Lynn Margulis proposed an extracellular origin for mitochondria (Margulis, 1970 (Margulis, , 1993 ). An ancestral cell, perhaps an archaeon, was infected by an anaerobic bacterium, which gave rise to mitochondria. Similarly, cyanobacteria formed the chloroplasts in modern plant cells. Mitochondria arose around 1.45 billion years ago (BYA) (Embley and Martin, 2006) . Mitochondria and chloroplasts are the most striking examples for a change in lifestyle from autonomous bacteria to endosymbionts. This transition is often considered as extremely rare and a hallmark of evolution of life on our planet. However, there are many other obligate intracellular parasites such as Rickettsia, Chlamydia trachomatis, Coxiella burnetii (the causative agent of Q fever), Mycobacterium leprae, M. tuberculosis, and M. mycoides (Beare et al., 2006) .
The change of lifestyle of the endosymbionts in the two cases of mitochondria and chloroplasts is striking. Both of them drastically reduced their genetic make-up. Mitochondria contain less than 37 genes, left from the original about 3,000 genes. Is endogenization of retroviruses, the ERVs, which are integrated into germline cells, related to endosymbiosis? Are these endosymbionts models for the transition from autonomous lifestyle to a parasitic life-which may have taken place with viruses? A more recent typical example for a reductive evolution are Rickettsia. These bacteria were assumed for some time to be viruses because of their obligatory intracellular parasitic existence. Rickettsia have evolved from autonomously replicating bacteria. Reductive evolution of endosymbionts can yield bacteria with tiny genomes on the expense of autonomous extracellular life. Their genomes are 1.11 mio bp in length with about 834 protein-coding genes, and loss of 24% by reductive evolution (Ogata et al., 2001) . Rickettsia may have some relationship with cyanobacteria, which are considered as the major symbionts.
Can one speculate that viruses may have been autonomous entities initially? Viroids may have undergone transition from autonomy to parasites, just as shown for mitochondria, chloroplasts or Rickettsia? To which extent have viruses been autonomous and independent of cellular metabolisms originally -and contributed to the origin of cells? Could they only later have lost their autonomy and become parasitic?
Viruses are minimalistic in their composition and must have undergone stringent gene reductions (Flint, 2015) . How small can their genomes become? Most coding RNA viruses still contain regulatory elements, ncRNA at the 3 and 5 terminal regions for ribosomal entry, protein synthesis, transcriptional regulation, and others.
A subgroup of retroviruses is an interesting example in respect to simultaneous loss and gain of genetic information. The oncogenic retroviruses or tumorviruses can recombine with cellular genes which under the promoters of retroviruses can become oncogenes and drivers of cancer. About a hundred oncogenes have been selected for in the laboratories and studied over decades for understanding the molecular mechanisms of cancer. Selection for growth advantages of the host cells led to the discovery of the fastest growth-promoting oncogenes we know today, such as Ras, Raf, ErbB or Myc, which are in part successful targets for anticancer drugs (Moelling et al., 1984) .
These oncogenes were in most cases taken up by the retroviruses at the expense of structural (gag), replicating (pol) or envelope (env) genes, and are often expressed as fusion proteins with Gag. Thus, oncogenic retroviruses are obligatory intracellular defective viruses and were selected for in the laboratory by researchers for the oncogenes with the most potent growth promoting ability. They need the supply of replicatory genes in trans from co-infecting helper viruses to infect other cells (Flint, 2015) . Retroviruses are able to pick up cellular genes, transfer and integrate them into neighboring cells. Some strains of Rous sarcoma virus maintain replication competent when carrying the cell-derived src (for sarcoma) oncogene encoding a protein of 536 amino acids that apparently can fit into the retroviral particle along with the full-size viral genome (Broecker et al., 2016a) . Spatial reasons may have influenced the formation of oncogenic retroviruses and limited their size and thereby led to their defective phenotypes.
There are indications that the uncontrolled activity of (retro)transposons in germline cells can result in diseases such as male infertility -presumably by "error catastrophe, " caused by too many transposition events. In mammals, piRNAs tame transposon activity by means of the RNase H activity of PIWI proteins during spermatogenesis (Girard et al., 2006) .
Only a minority of viruses are pathogens; most of them do not cause diseases. On the contrary, they are most important as drivers of evolution, as transmitters of genetic material, as innovative agents. In particular, the RNA viruses are the most innovative ones. Some of them are pathogenic and dangerous, such as HIV or influenza virus, or viroids in plants. RNA viruses are able to change so rapidly that the host immune system is unable to counteract the infection. Pathogenicity arises when environmental conditions change, for instance, when a virus enters a new organism or species.
Increase of cellular complexity by viruses is an important feature of evolution. Such major evolutionary changes are recently taken as arguments against the evolutionary theory by Charles Darwin who considered gradual changes, small increments by mutations as the main basis for selection and evolution. New criticism is addressing this thinking, considering larger changes as evolutionary drivers. Such changes arise by many complex phenomena such as endosymbiosis, infection by prokaryotes, viruses and fungi, recombination of genes, HGT, infections, sex. Dramatic changes such as endosymbiosis or pathogen infections extend Darwin's concept of evolution.
There are numerous examples for the contribution of viruses to the evolution of life since at least as long as 550 MYA (Hayward, 2017) . But genetic noise through random mutations does not allow us to go back to the origin of life. It may not be impossible that the earliest compartment was indistinguishable, either a pre-cell or a pre-virus. By analogy one may speculate that at some point autonomous viruses gave up independence for an obligatory intracellular life -as has been described for mitochondria and chloroplasts but also intracellular bacteria such as Rickettsia. This speculation is based on the concept that early life must have started simple and with high genetic variability and then became more complex. But complexity can be given up for a less energy consuming lifestyle with small genomes and high speed of replication (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . Therefore, the question may be repeated: "Are viruses our oldest ancestors?" Some fossil life can be partially reproduced in vitro by Spiegelman's Monster and Eigen's follow-up experiments, explaining the great surviving potential of simple ncRNA.
Viruses can be pathogens, but their recognition as primarily causing diseases is wrong. This notion is based on the history of viruses in medicine, as explained in a book entitled "Viruses: More Friends Than Foes" (Moelling, 2017) . The scenario described here focuses on viruses as drivers of evolution.
The early RNA world gained interest 20-30 years ago as evidenced by the references provided above. Surprisingly, there are scientists who still believe in the "pansperm hypothesis" and think that retroviruses are of extraterrestric origin (Steele et al., 2018) . The recent interest in the origin of life arose from the newly discovered exoplanets whose number increases daily -and which may be as numerous as 10 25 . Thus, pure statistics make some people believe that there is extraterrestrial life.
The extraterrestric life is mimicked in laboratories on Earth with many assumptions -perhaps this overview stimulates some thinking. The discussion presented here should be taken as concept about simple replicating and evolving entities possibly arising from different building blocks in other environments, with structure being more relevant than sequence. | What do ribozymes lack? | 1,185 | the genetic triplet code and do not encode proteins | 4,002 |
1,690 | Viruses and Evolution – Viruses First? A Personal Perspective
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6433886/
SHA: f3b9fc0f8e0a431366196d3e835e1ec368b379d1
Authors: Moelling, Karin; Broecker, Felix
Date: 2019-03-19
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00523
License: cc-by
Abstract: The discovery of exoplanets within putative habitable zones revolutionized astrobiology in recent years. It stimulated interest in the question about the origin of life and its evolution. Here, we discuss what the roles of viruses might have been at the beginning of life and during evolution. Viruses are the most abundant biological entities on Earth. They are present everywhere, in our surrounding, the oceans, the soil and in every living being. Retroviruses contributed to about half of our genomic sequences and to the evolution of the mammalian placenta. Contemporary viruses reflect evolution ranging from the RNA world to the DNA-protein world. How far back can we trace their contribution? Earliest replicating and evolving entities are the ribozymes or viroids fulfilling several criteria of life. RNA can perform many aspects of life and influences our gene expression until today. The simplest structures with non-protein-coding information may represent models of life built on structural, not genetic information. Viruses today are obligatory parasites depending on host cells. Examples of how an independent lifestyle might have been lost include mitochondria, chloroplasts, Rickettsia and others, which used to be autonomous bacteria and became intracellular parasites or endosymbionts, thereby losing most of their genes. Even in vitro the loss of genes can be recapitulated all the way from coding to non-coding RNA. Furthermore, the giant viruses may indicate that there is no sharp border between living and non-living entities but an evolutionary continuum. Here, it is discussed how viruses can lose and gain genes, and that they are essential drivers of evolution. This discussion may stimulate the thinking about viruses as early possible forms of life. Apart from our view “viruses first”, there are others such as “proteins first” and “metabolism first.”
Text: Mycoplasma mycoides by systematic deletion of individual genes resulted in a synthetic minimal genome of 473 genes (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Can one consider simpler living entities?
There are elements with zero genes that fulfill many criteria for early life: ribozymes, catalytic RNAs closely related to viroids. They were recovered in vitro from 10 15 molecules (aptamers), 220 nucleotides in length, by 10 rounds of selection. Among the many RNA species present in this collection of quasispecies RNAs were catalytically active members, enzymatically active ribozymes. The sequence space for 220-mer RNAs is about 3 × 10 132 (Eigen, 1971; Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Brackett and Dieckmann, 2006) .
The selected ribozymes were able to replicate, cleave, join, and form peptide bonds. They can polymerize progeny chemically, allow for mutations to occur and can evolve. One molecule serves as catalyst, the other one as substrate. Replication of ribozymes was demonstrated in the test tube (Lincoln and Joyce, 2009) . Ribozymes can form peptide bonds between amino acids (Zhang and Cech, 1997) . Thus, small peptides were available by ribozyme activity. Consequently, an RNA modification has been proposed as peptide nucleic acid (PNA), with more stable peptide bonds instead of phosphodiester bonds (Zhang and Cech, 1997; Joyce, 2002) . Replication of RNA molecules can be performed chemically from RNA without polymerase enzymes. In addition, deoxyribozymes can form from ribonucleotides (Wilson and Szostak, 1999) . Thus, DNA can arise from RNA chemically, without the key protein enzyme, the reverse transcriptase.
An entire living world is possible from non-coding RNA (ncRNA) before evolution of the genetic code and protein enzymes. Ribozymes naturally consist of circular single-stranded RNAs (Orgel, 2004) . They lack the genetic triplet code and do not encode proteins. Instead, they exhibit structural information by hairpin-loops that form hydrogen bonds between incomplete double strands, and loops free to interact with other molecules. They represent a quasispecies in which many species of RNA may form, such as ribozymes, tRNA-like molecules, and other ncRNAs. RNAs within such a pool can bind amino acids. Ninety different amino acids have been identified on the Murchison meteorite found in Australia, while on Earth only about 20 of them are used for protein synthesis (Meierhenrich, 2008) . Where formation of ribozymes occurred on the early Earth is a matter of speculation. The hydrothermal vents such as black smokers in the deep ocean are possibilities where life may have started (Martin et al., 2008) . There, temperature gradients and clay containing minerals such as magnesium or manganese are available. Pores or niches offer possibilities for concentration of building blocks, which is required for chemical reactions to occur. Interestingly, also ice is a candidate for ribozyme formation and chemical reactions. Ice crystals displace the biomolecules into the liquid phase, which leads to concentration, creating a quasicellular compartmentalization where de novo synthesis of nucleotide precursors is promoted. There, RNA and ribozymes can emerge, which are capable of self-replication (Attwater et al., 2010) .
tRNA-amino acid complexes can find RNAs as "mRNAs." Such interactions could have contributed to the evolution of the genetic code. This sequence of events can lead to primitive ribosome precursors. Ribozymes are the essential catalytic elements in ribosomes: "The ribosome is a ribozyme" (Cech, 2000) , supplemented with about a hundred scaffold proteins later during evolution. The proteins have structural functions and contribute indirectly to enzymatic activity. Are these ribosomebound ribozymes fossils from the early Earth? Small peptides can be formed by ribozymes before ribosomes evolved, whereby single or dimeric amino acids may originate from the universe (Meierhenrich, 2008) .
Small peptides with basic amino acids can increase the catalytic activity of ribozymes as shown in vitro (Müller et al., 1994) . Such proteins are known as RNA-binding proteins from RNA viruses that protect the RNA genome, with motifs such as RAPRKKG of the nucleocapsid NCp7 of HIV (Schmalzbauer et al., 1996) . Peptides can enhance the catalytic activity of ribozymes up to a 100-fold (Müller et al., 1994) . Such peptides of RNA viruses serve as chaperones that remove higher ordered RNA structures, allowing for more efficient interaction of RNA molecules and increasing transcription rates of RNA polymerases (Müller et al., 1994) . Ribonucleoproteins may have also been functionally important during the evolution of ribosomes (Harish and Caetano-Anolles, 2012) .
These pre-ribosomal structures are also similar to precursorlike structures of retroviruses. Reverse transcription can be performed by ribozymes chemically. This action does not necessarily require a protein polymerase such as the reverse transcriptase. Similarly, deoxyribonucleotides can arise by removal of an oxygen without the need of a protein enzyme (a reductase) as today, and allow for DNA polymerization (Wilson and Szostak, 1999; Joyce, 2002) . The same elements of the precursors for ribosomes are also building blocks of retroviruses, which may have a similar evolutionary origin (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . tRNAs serve as primers for the reverse transcriptase, and the sequence of promoters of transposable elements are derived from tRNAs (Lander et al., 2001) . The ribozymes developed into more complex self-cleaving group II introns with insertion of genes encoding a reverse transcriptase and additional proteins (Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) (Figure 1) .
It came as a surprise that the genomes of almost all species are rich in ncDNA, transcribed into ncRNAs but not encoding proteins, as evidenced, for instance, by the "Encyclopedia of DNA Elements" (ENCODE) project. ncDNA amounts to more than 98% of the human DNA genome (Deveson et al., 2017) . Higher organisms tend to have more non-coding information, which allows for more complex modes of gene regulation. The ncRNAs are regulators of the protein-coding sequences. Highly complex organisms such as humans typically have a high number of ncRNA and regulatory mechanisms. ncRNA can range from close to zero in the smallest bacteria such as Pelagibacter ubique to about 98% in the human genome.
RNA viruses such as the retrovirus HIV harbor ncRNAs for gene regulation such as the trans-activating response element (TAR), the binding site for the Tat protein for early viral gene expression. Tat has a highly basic domain comprising mostly Lys and Arg residues, resembling other RNA binding proteins. ncRNA also serves on viral RNA genomes as ribosomal entry sites, primer binding sites or packaging signals. DNA synthesis depends on RNA synthesis as initial event, with RNA primers as starters for DNA replication, inside of cells as FIGURE 1 | A compartment is shown with essential components of life as discussed in the text. Non-coding RNA (ncRNA), ribozymes or viroids, can perform many steps for life without protein-coding genes but only by structural information. Individual amino acids are indicated as black dots and may be available on Earth from the universe. DNA may have existed before retroviruses. The compartment can be interpreted as pre-virus or pre-cell. Viroid, green; RNA, red; DNA, black.
well as during retroviral replication, proving a requirement of RNA (Flint, 2015) .
The number of mammalian protein-coding genes is about 20,000. Surprisingly, this is only a fifth of the number of genes of bread wheat (Appels et al., 2018) . Tulips, maize and other plants also have larger genomes, indicating that the number of genes does not necessarily reflect the complexity of an organism. What makes these plant genomes so large, is still an open question. Could the giant genomes possibly be the result to breeding of plants by farmers or gardeners?
According to Szostak there are molecules which appear like relics from the RNA world such as acetyl-CoA or vitamin B12, both of which are bound to a ribonucleotide for no obvious reason -was it "forgotten" to be removed? (Roberts and Szostak, 1997; Szostak et al., 2001; Szostak, 2011) . Perhaps the connected RNA serves as structural stabilizer. Lipid vesicles could have formed the first compartments and enclosed ribozymes, tRNAs with selected amino acids, and RNA which became mRNA. Is this a pre-cell or pre-virus (Figure 1) ? Patel et al. (2015) demonstrated that the building blocks of life, ribonucleotides, lipids and amino acids, can be formed from C, H, O, P, N, S in a "one pot" synthesis. This study can be regarded as a follow-up study of the classical Urey-Miller in vitro synthesis of biomolecules (Miller, 1953; Miller and Urey, 1959) . Transition from the RNA to the DNA world was promoted by the formation of the reverse transcriptase. The enzyme was first described in retroviruses but it is almost ubiquitous and found in numerous cellular species, many of which with unknown functions (Simon and Zimmerly, 2008; Lescot et al., 2016) . It is an important link between the RNA and the DNA worlds. The name reverse transcriptase is historical and irritating because it is the "real" transcriptase during the transition from the RNA to the DNA world. Similarly, the ribonuclease H (RNase H) is an essential enzyme of retroviruses (Mölling et al., 1971) . The RNase H turned out to be one of the five most frequent and ancient proteins (Ma et al., 2008 ) that belongs to a superfamily of more than sixty different unique representatives and 152 families with numerous functions (Majorek et al., 2014) .
Some of the many tRNAs can become loaded with amino acids. There are viruses containing tRNA-like structures (TLS), resembling these early RNAs (Dreher, 2009) . The TLS of these viruses typically bind to a single amino acid. TLS-viruses include plant viruses, such as Turnip yellow mosaic virus, in Peanut clump virus, Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), and Brome mosaic virus. Only half a tRNA is found in Narnaviruses of fungi. The amino acids known to be components of tRNA-like viruses are valine, histidine and tyrosine. The structures were also designated as "mimicry, " enhancing translation (Dreher, 2009 (Dreher, , 2010 . They look like "frozen" precursor-like elements for protein synthesis. This combination of a partial tRNA linked to one amino acid can be interpreted as an evolutionary early step toward protein synthesis, trapped in a viral element.
Ribozymes are related to the protein-free viroids. Viroids are virus-like elements that belong to the virosphere, the world of viruses (Chela-Flores, 1994) . Viroids lack protein coats and therefore were initially not designated as viruses but virus-like viroids when they were discovered in 1971 by Theodor Diener. He described viroids as "living fossils" (Diener, 2016) (Figure 2) .
From infected potatoes, Diener isolated the Potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd) whose genome was about a 100-fold smaller than those of viruses known at that time. The viroids known today are ranging from 246 to 467 nucleotides. They contain circular single-stranded RNA, are protein-free and self-replicating with no genetic information, but only structural FIGURE 2 | Viroids are hairpin-loop structures and are shown schematically and as electron micrograph. Viroids are, like ribozymes, without genetic information and play major biological roles today in plant diseases, in carnation flowers, in liver cancer, as catalyst of protein synthesis in ribosomes and as circular regulatory RNAs, as "sponges" for other regulatory RNAs.
information in the form of hairpin-loops (Riesner et al., 1979) . They can generate copies of themselves in the appropriate environment. They were designated as the "frontiers of life" (Flores et al., 2014) .
The knowledge of virus composition was based on TMV and its crystallization by Wendell Stanley in 1935 (Pennazio and Roggero, 2000) . The genome of TMV is protein-coding singlestranded RNA of about 6,400 nucleotides that is enclosed by a rod-like protein coat. Viroids, in contrast, do not encode proteins and lack coats but they are closely related to viruses. Viroids can lose their autonomy and rely on host RNA polymerases to replicate, are capable of infecting plants and many are economically important pathogens. There are two families, the nucleus-replicating Pospiviroidae such as PSTVd and the chloroplast-replicating Avsunviroidae like the Avocado sunblotch viroid (ASBVd). Their replication requires host enzymes. Thus, autonomy is replaced by dependence on host enzymes and an intracellular lifestyle.
Most viroids are often enzymatically active ribozymes -yet they are examples that this trait can get lost as a result of changing environmental conditions. Loss of ribozyme activity is a functional, not a genetic loss. Only the nuclear variants, the Pospiviroidae, can lose their ribozyme activity and use the cellular RNase III enzyme for their replication. In contrast, the Avsunviroidae are still active hammerhead ribozymes. Thus, inside the nucleus of a host cell, the enzymatic RNA function can become unnecessary. Not genes, but a function, the catalytic activity, gets lost.
Viroids did apparently not gain genes but cooperated for a more complex lifestyle. For example, Carnation small viroid-like RNA (CarSV RNA) cooperates with a retrovirus and is accompanied by a homologous DNA generated by a reverse transcriptase. This enzyme presumably originates from a pararetrovirus of plants. Pararetroviruses package virus particles at a different stage during replication than retroviruses, the DNA, not the RNA. This unique combination between two viral elements has so far only been detected with CarSV in carnation flowers (Flores et al., 2005 (Flores et al., , 2014 . Why did such a cooperation evolve -perhaps by breeding gardeners? RNA is sensitive to degradation; therefore, genetic increase and growth of the genome may not be favorable energetically -at least not in plants. Gain of function is, in this case, cooperation.
The circular RNA (circRNA) is related to ribozymes/viroids as a chief regulator of other regulatory RNAs, a "sponge" absorbing small RNAs. Micro RNAs (miRNAs) are post-transcriptional regulators that are affected by the presence of circRNAs. circRNAs were detected in human and mouse brains and testes as well as in plants. They can bind 70 conserved miRNAs in a cell and amount up to 25,000 molecules (Hansen et al., 2013) . Their structure is reminiscent of catalytically active ribozymes.
There is an exceptional viroid that gained coding information and entered the human liver (Taylor, 2009) . The viroid is known as hepatitis delta virus (HDV). It has the smallest genome of any known animal virus of about 1,680 nucleotides. It has properties typical of viroids, since it contains circRNA, forms similar hairpin-loops and replicates in the nucleus using host enzymes. Two polymerases have to redirect their specificity from DNA to RNA to generate the HDV genome and antigenome. Both of them have ribozyme activity. In contrast to other ribozymes, HDV encodes a protein, the hepatitis delta antigen (HDVAg) that occurs in two forms, the small-HDVAg (24 kDa) supporting replication and the large-HDVAg (27 kDa) that helps virion assembly. The gene was presumably picked up from the host cell by recombination of HDV's mRNA intermediate with a host mRNA. Transmission depends on a helper virus, the Hepatitis B virus (HBV), which delivers the coat (Taylor, 2009 ) Does packaging by a helper virus protect the genome and thereby allow for a larger viroid to exist?
In plants, viroids may not be able to become bigger possibly due to their sensitivity to degradation -but they cannot become much smaller either. Only a single viroid is known that is completely composed of protein-coding RNA with triplets (AbouHaidar et al., 2014). Viroids and related replicating RNAs are error-prone replicating units and the error frequency imposes a certain minimal size onto them, as they would otherwise become extinct. This mechanism has been described as "error catastrophe, " which prevents survival (Eigen, 1971 (Eigen, , 2013 . The viroids and related RNAs are the smallest known replicons. Smaller ones would become extinct in the absence of repair systems.
In summary, RNA can catalyze many reactions. Protein enzymes which may have evolved later have higher catalytic activities. Ribozymes are carriers of information, but do not require coding genes. Information is stored in their sequence and structure. Thus, replication of an initial RNA is followed by flow of information, from DNA to RNA to protein, as described the Central Dogma (Crick, 1968) . Even an information flow from protein to DNA has been described for some archaeal proteins (Béguin et al., 2015) . The DNA-protein world contains numerous ncRNAs with key functions. ncRNA may serve as a model compound for the origin of life on other planets. Hereby not the chemical composition of this molecule is of prime relevance, but its simplicity and multifunctionality. Furthermore, RNA is software and hardware in a single molecule, which makes it unique in our world. There are other scenarios besides the here discussed "virus-first, " such as "protein-first", "metabolism-fist" or the "lipid world" (Segré et al., 2001; Andras and Andras, 2005; Vasas et al., 2010; Moelling, 2012) . Some of these alternative concepts were built on phylogenomics, the reconstruction of the tree of life by genome sequencing (Delsuc et al., 2005) . Surprisingly, it was Sir Francis Crick, one of the discoverers of the DNA double-helix, who stated that he would not be surprised about a world completely built of RNA. A similar prediction was made by Walter Gilbert (Crick, 1968; Gilbert, 1986) . What a vision! Our world was almost 50 years later defined as "RNAprotein" world (Altman, 2013) . One can speculate our world was built of ribozymes or viroids, which means "viruses first."
ncRNAs appear as relics from the past RNA world, before DNA, the genetic code and proteins evolved. However, ncRNA is essential in our biological DNA world today. It is possible to produce such ncRNA today in the test tube by loss of genic information from protein-coding RNA. This reduction to ncRNA was demonstrated in vitro with phage RNA. Phage Qβ genomic RNA, 4,217 nucleotides in length, was incubated in the presence of Qβ replicase, free nucleotides and salts, a rich milieu in the test tube. The RNA was allowed to replicate by means of the Qβ replicase. Serial transfer of aliquots to fresh medium led to ever faster replication rates and reduction of genomic size, down to 218 nucleotides of ncRNA in 74 generations. This study demonstrated that, depending on environmental conditions, an extreme gene reduction can take place. This experiment performed in 1965 was designated as "Spiegelman's Monster." Coding RNA became replicating ncRNA (Spiegelman et al., 1965; Kacian et al., 1972) ! Manfred Eigen extended this experiment and demonstrated further that a mixture containing no RNA to start with but only ribonucleotides and the Qβ replicase can under the right conditions in a test tube spontaneously generate self-replicating ncRNA. This evolved into a form similar to Spiegelman's Monster. The presence of the replicase enzyme was still necessary in these studies. Furthermore, a change in enzyme concentration and addition of short RNAs or an RNA intercalator influenced the arising RNA population (Sumper and Luce, 1975; Eigen, 2013) . Thus, the complexity of genomes depends on the environment: poor conditions lead to increased complexity and rich environments to reduced complexity.
The process demonstrated in this experiment with viral components indicates that reversion to simplicity, reduction in size, loss of genetic information and speed in replication can be major forces of life, even though this appears to be like a reversion of evolution. The experiment can perhaps be generalized from the test tube to a principle, that the most successful survivors on our planet are the viruses and microorganisms, which became the most abundant entities. Perhaps life can start from there again.
These studies raise the question of how RNA molecules can become longer, if the small polymers become smaller and smaller, replicate faster and outcompete longer ones. This may be overcome by heat flow across an open pore in submerged rocks, which concentrates replicating oligonucleotides from a constant feeding flow and selection for longer strands. This has been described for an increase from 100 to 1,000 nucleotides in vitro. RNA molecules shorter than 75 nucleotides will die out (Kreysing et al., 2015) . Could a poor environment lead to an increase of complexity? This could be tested. Ribozymes were shown to grow in size by uptake of genes, as demonstrated for HDV (Taylor, 2009 ).
An interesting recent unexpected example supporting the notion that environmental conditions influence genetic complexity, is the human gut microbiome. Its complexity increases with diverse food, while uniform rich food reduces its diversity and may lead to diseases such as obesity. Colonization of the human intestinal tract starts at birth. A few dozen bacterial and viral/phage species are conserved between individuals (core sequences) as a stable composition (Broecker et al., 2016c . Dysbiosis has been observed in several chronic diseases and in obesity, a loss of bacterial richness and diversity. Nutrition under affluent conditions with sugar-rich food contributes to obesity, which results in a significant reduction of the complexity of the microbiome. This reduction is difficult to revert (Cotillard et al., 2013; Le Chatelier et al., 2013) . The gut microbiome in human patients with obesity is reminiscent of the gene reduction described in the Spiegelman's Monster experiment: reduction of genes in a rich environment.
The reduction of the complexity of the microbiome is in part attributed to the action of phages, which under such conditions, defined as stress, lyse the bacteria. Fecal microbiota transplantation can even be replaced by soluble fractions containing phages or metabolites from the donor without bacteria (Ott et al., 2017) . Analogously, the most highly complex microbiomes are found in indigenous human tribes in Africa, which live on a broad variety of different nutrients. It is a slow process, though, to increase gut microbiota complexity by diverse nutrition. The obesity-associated microbiota that survive are fitter and more difficult to counteract. Urbanization and westernization of the diet is associated with a loss of microbial biodiversity, loss of microbial organisms and genes (Segata, 2015) .
To understand the mechanism and driving force for genome reduction, deletion rates were tested by insertion of an indicator gene into the Salmonella enterica genome. The loss of the indicator gene was monitored by serial passage in rich medium. After 1,000 generations about 25% of the deletions caused increased bacterial fitness. Deletions resulted in smaller genomes with reduced or absence of DNA repair genes (Koskiniemi et al., 2012) . Gene loss conferred a higher fitness to the bacteria under these experimental conditions.
The recently discovered mimiviruses and other giant viruses are worth considering for understanding the evolution of life with respect to the contribution of viruses. Their hosts are, for example, Acanthamoeba, Chlorella, and Coccolithus algae (Emiliania huxleyi), but also corals or sponges as discussed more recently. Mimiviruses were first discovered in cooling water towers in Bradford, United Kingdom in 2003 with about 1,000 genes, most of which unrelated to previously known genes. Mimiviruses have received attention because they contain elements that were considered hallmarks of living cells, not of viruses, such as elements required for protein synthesis, tRNAs and amino acid transferases. The mimiviruses harbor these building blocks as incomplete sets not sufficient for independent protein synthesis as bacteria or archaea can perform, preventing them from leading an autonomous life (La Scola et al., 2003 Scola et al., , 2008 . They are larger than some bacteria. Giant viruses can be looked at as being on an evolutionary path toward a cellular organism. Alternatively, they may have evolved from a cellular organism by loss of genetic information (Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015) . Giant viruses have frequently taken up genes from their hosts by horizontal gene transfer (HGT) (La Scola et al., 2008; Nasir and Caetano-Anolles, 2015; Colson et al., 2018) . A graph on genome sizes shows that mimiviruses and bacteria overlap in size, indicating a continuous transition between viruses and bacteria and between living and non-living worlds (based on Holmes, 2011) (Figure 3) . Other giant viruses, such as megaviruses, were discovered in the ocean of Chile with 1,120 genes. Most recently the Klosneuvirus was identified in the sewage of the monastery Klosterneuburg in Austria in 2017 with 1.57 million (mio) basepairs (Mitch, 2017) . Pithovirus sibericum is the largest among giant viruses discovered to date with a diameter of 1.5 microns, a genome of 470,000 bp with 467 putative genes, 1.6 microns in length, and it is presumably 30,000 years old as it was recovered from permafrost in Siberia (Legendre et al., 2014) . The smaller Pandoraviruses with 1 micron in length have five times larger genomes, 2,500,000 bp (Philippe et al., 2013) (Figure 3) .
The giant viruses can even be hosts to smaller viruses, the virophages, reminiscent of bacteriophages, the viruses of bacteria. These virophages such as Sputnik are only 50 nm in size with 18,343 bp of circular dsDNA and 21 predicted proteincoding genes. They replicate in viral factories and consume the resources of the mimivirus, thereby destroying it. Some, virophages can even integrate into the genome of the cellular host and can be reactivated when the host is infected by giant viruses. Thus, giant viruses suggest that viruses are close to living entities or may have been alive (La Scola et al., 2008; Fischer and Hackl, 2016) . In biology it is common to distinguish between living and dead matter by the ability to synthesize proteins and replicate autonomously. The giant viruses may be considered as missing link between the two, because they harbor "almost" the protein synthesis apparatus. The transition from living to the non-living world is continuous, not separated by a sharp borderline (Figure 3) .
Viruses are not considered alive by most of the scientific community and as written in textbooks, because they cannot replicate autonomously. Yet some of the giant viruses are equipped with almost all components of the protein synthesis machinery close to bacteria suggesting that they belong to the living matter (Schulz et al., 2017) . The ribozymes may have been the earliest replicating entity. Perhaps also other viruses were initially more independent of the early Earth than they are today. As described in Figure 1 there may have been initially no major difference between an early virus or an early cell. Only later viruses may have given up their autonomous replication and became parasites -as has been described for some bacteria (see below).
Efforts have been made to identify the smallest living cell that is still autonomously replicating. Among the presumably smallest naturally occurring bacteria is Pelagibacter ubique of the SAR11 clade of bacteria (Giovannoni, 2017) , which was discovered in 1990. It is an alpha-proteobacterium with 1,389 genes present ubiquitously in all oceans. It can reach up to 10 28 free living cells in total and represents about 25% of microbial plankton cells. Very little of its DNA is non-coding. It harbors podophage-type phages, designated as "pelagiphage" (Zhao et al., 2013) . This small bacterium was designated as the most common organism on the planet. Why is it so successful? This autonomous bacterium is smaller than some parasitic giant viruses. Craig Venter, who first succeeded in sequencing the human genome, tried to minimize the putative smallest genome of a living species, from Mycoplasma mycoides, a parasitic bacterium that lives in ruminants (Gibson et al., 2008 (Gibson et al., , 2010 . His group synthesized a genome of 531,000 bp with 473 genes, 149 of them (32%) with unknown functions (Hutchison et al., 2016) . Among the smallest parasitic living organisms is Nanoarchaeum equitans. It is a thermophile archaeon which lives at 80 • C and at pH 6 with 2% salt (Huber et al., 2003) . Its genome has a size of 490,000 bp and encodes 540 genes. N. equitans is an obligate symbiont of a bigger archaeon, Ignicoccus riding on it as on a horse, hence the name (Huber et al., 2003) .
The world of viruses covers a range of three logs in size of their genomes: from zero genes to about 2,500 genes amounting to about 2,500,000 bp of DNA. The zero-gene viroids are about 300 bases in length (Figure 3) .
The virosphere is the most successful reservoir of biological entities on our planet in terms of numbers of particles, speed of replication, growth rates, and sequence space. There are about 10 33 viruses on our planet and they are present in every single existing species (Suttle, 2005) .
There is no living species without viruses! Viruses also occur freely in the oceans, in the soil, in clouds up to the stratosphere and higher, to at least 300 km in altitude. They populate the human intestine, birth canal, and the outside of the body as protective layer against microbial populations. Microbes contain phages that are activated during stress conditions such as lack of nutrients, change in temperatures, lack of space and other changes of environmental conditions.
One of the most earth-shaking papers of this century was the publication of the human genome sequence (Lander et al., 2001) . About half, possibly even two-thirds of the sequence are composed of more or less complete endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) and related retroelements (REs) (de Koning et al., 2011) . REs amplify via copy-and-paste mechanisms involving a reverse transcriptase step from an RNA intermediate into DNA. In addition, DNA transposable elements (TEs) move by a cutand-paste mechanism. The origin of REs is being discussed as remnants of ancient retroviral germline infections that became evolutionarily fixed in the genome. About 450,000 human ERV (HERV) elements constitute about 8% of the human genome consisting of hallmark retroviral elements like the gag, pol, env genes and flanking long terminal repeats (LTR) that act as promoters (Lander et al., 2001) . Howard Temin, one of the discoverers of the reverse transcriptase, in 1985 already described endogenous retrovirus-like elements, which he estimated to about 10% of the human and mouse genome sequence (Temin, 1985) . The actual number is about 45% as estimated today (Lander et al., 2001) . In some genes such as the Protein Kinase Inhibitor B (PKIB) gene we determined about 70% retrovirusrelated sequences (Moelling and Broecker, 2015) . Is there a limit? Could it have been 100%? Retroviruses are estimated to have entered the lineage of the mammalian genome 550 million years ago (MYA) (Hayward, 2017) . Older ERV sequences may exist but are unrecognizable today due to the accumulation of mutations.
ERVs undergo mutations, deletions or homologous recombination events with large deletions and can become as short as solo LTR elements, which are a few hundred bp in length -the left-overs from full-length retroviral genomes of about 10,000 bp. The LTR promoters can deregulate neighboring genes. Homologous recombination events may be considered as gene loss or gene reduction events. It is the assumption that the ERVs, which were no longer needed for host cell defense, were no longer selected for by evolution and consequently deleted as unnecessary consumers of energy.
Eugene Koonin points out that infection and integration are unique events occurring at a fast pace, while loss and gene reduction may take much longer time frames (Wolf and Koonin, 2013) .
A frequent gene reduction of eukaryotic genomes is the loss of the viral envelope protein encoded by the env gene. Without a coat, retroviruses can no longer leave the cell and infect other cells. They lose mobility and become obligatory intracellular elements. Helper viruses can supply envelope proteins in trans and mobilize the viruses. TEs or REs can be regarded as examples of coat-free intracellular virus relics -or could it have been the other way round, perhaps precursors of full-length retroviruses?
These elements can be amplified intracellularly and modify the host genomes by integration with the potential danger of gene disruption and genetic changes. REs can lead to gene duplications and pseudogene development, with one copy for stable conservation of acquired functions and the other one for innovations (Cotton and Page, 2005) . Such duplications constitute large amounts of mammalian genomes (Zhang, 2003) . Retroviruses have an RNase H moiety duplication, one of which serves as a catalytically inactive linker between the RT polymerase and the enzymatically active RNase H (Xiong and Eickbush, 1990; Malik and Eickbush, 2001; Moelling and Broecker, 2015; Moelling et al., 2017) . This gene duplication dates back to 500 mio years (Cotton and Page, 2005) .
Gene duplications are a common cause of cancer, which often occurs only in the genome of the cancer cell itself, less affecting offsprings. Myc, Myb, ErbB2, Ras, and Raf are oncogenes amplified in diverse types of human cancers (Vogelstein and Kinzler, 2002) . The ability of retroviruses to integrate makes them distinct from endosymbionts which stay separate. Yet the net result is very similar, acquisition of new genetic information, which is transmitted to the next generation, if the germline is infected and endogenization of the virus occurred.
Viral integration is not limited to eukaryotic cells but also a mechanism in prokaryotes for maintenance of the lysogenic state of phages inside bacteria.
Also, for other eukaryotic viruses such as HBV, the envelope surface antigen BHsAg can be deleted, which leads to an obligatory intracellular life style for the virus, which especially in the presence of HCV promotes cancer (Yang et al., 2016) .
HIV has been shown to rapidly lose one of its auxiliary genes, nef, originally for negative factor. The gene was lost within a rather low number of passages of the virus grown under tissue culture conditions by selection for high virus titer producing cells. Deletion of nef resulted in a significant increase of the virus titer in culture -hence the name. The nef gene product was of no need inside tissue culture cells, rather it was inhibitory for replication. However, it is essential for pathogenicity in animals, and subsequently nef was reinterpreted as "necessary factor" (Flint, 2015) .
Also, the human hosts of HIV can lose a significant terminal portion of a seven transmembrane receptor in lymphocytes, the primary target cell for HIV entry and for virus uptake. This molecule, the CCR5 cytokine receptor is truncated by 32 carboxy-terminal amino acids (CCR5-32), disabling the receptor functionally. The allele frequency of the mutant CCR5-32 mutant is about 10% in the European population, making these people resistant to HIV infections (Solloch et al., 2017) . This gene loss in Europeans has been shown to make the individuals resistant not only against HIV infection but also against malaria. This may have been the selective pressure in the past before HIV/AIDS arose. No side effect for humans lacking this gene has been described (Galvani and Slatkin, 2003) .
Viruses have been proven to be drivers of evolution (Villarreal and Witzany, 2010) , including the human genome, which by at least 45% is composed of sequences related to retroviruses. In addition, endogenized retroviruses supplied the syncytin genes that are essential for the development of the mammalian placenta, and allowed the growth of embryos without its rejection by the maternal immune system (Dupressoir et al., 2012) . Thus, the same property which causes immunodeficiency in HIV-infected patients and leads to AIDS causes syncytia formation, cell fusion after infection by a retrovirus. Viruses have also been proposed to be at the origin of the evolution of adaptive immunity (Villarreal, 2009 ). Thus, viruses shaped genomes by supplying essential genes and mechanisms.
Endogenization of retroviruses has occurred in the mammalian genomes for at least 550 mio years (Hayward, 2017) . If the integrated ERVs did not provide any selective advantage, they deteriorated and accumulated mutations with loss of function. This was directly proven by reconstruction of an infectious retrovirus from the consensus sequence of 9 defective endogenous virus sequences, designated as Phoenix. The virus was expressed from a constructed synthetic DNA clone in cell culture and formed virus particles identified by high resolution microscopic analysis (Dewannieux and Heidmann, 2013) .
The koalas in Australia are currently undergoing endogenization of a retrovirus (koala retrovirus, KoRV) in "real time" and demonstrate possible consequences for immunity. In the early 1900s, some individuals were transferred to islands, including Kangaroo Island, close to the Australian mainland for repopulation purposes, as koalas were threatened to become extinct. Today, the majority of the koala population is infected by KoRV, which is closely related to the Gibbon ape leukemia virus (GALV). Yet, koalas isolated on Kangaroo Island are KoRV negative, which allows dating the introduction of KoRV into the koala population to about one hundred years ago. Many of the infected koalas fell ill and died, yet some populations became resistant within about 100 years, corresponding to about 10 generations. The koalas likely developed resistance due to the integrated DNA proviruses. The retrovirus is transmitted as exogenous as well as endogenous virus, similar to the Jaagsiekte sheep retrovirus (JSRV), whereby the endogenized viruses protect with a viral gene product, such as Env, against de novo infections by "superinfection exclusion" (Tarlinton, 2012) . The contribution of retroviruses to the antiviral defense is striking, since all retroviral genes have analogous genes in the siRNA/RNAi defense mechanism of eukaryotic cells (Moelling et al., 2006) .
Retroviruses can protect against infection by other related viruses, for example, by expressing Env proteins that block cellsurface receptors (Villarreal, 2011) . A comparable mechanism protects bacterial cells against DNA phages, by integrated phage DNA fragments that are transcribed into mRNA and hybridize to incoming new DNA phages and thereby lead to their destruction by hybrid-specific nucleases, CRISPR/Cas immunity (Charpentier and Doudna, 2013) . It is often not realized that immunity acquisition in bacteria and mammalian cells follow analogous mechanisms (Figure 4) .
Integration of retroviruses normally occurs in somatic cells after infection as an obligatory step during the viral life cycle. Infection of germline cells can lead to transmission to the next generation and ultimately result in inherited resistance. Endogenized retroviruses likely caused resistance FIGURE 4 | Viruses protect against viruses: retroviruses protect a cell against a new infection by a similar virus designated as "superinfection exclusion" or viral interference. This is mediated by viral gene products such as proteins or nucleic acids. Similarly, phages protect against phages: superinfection of bacteria is prevented by CRISPR/Cas RNA originating from previous infections. The mechanisms of defense against viruses and phages are analogous. Protection by viruses or phages against superinfections represents cellular defense and acquired immunity. The four examples are discussed in the text.
to the exogenous counterparts. Similarly, resistance to Simian Immune Deficiency virus (SIV) in some monkey species may be explained by endogenization (Li et al., 2017 (Li et al., , 2018 . In the case of phages and their prokaryotic hosts the mechanism is described as CRISPR/Cas, which follow analogous principles of "endogenization" of incoming genetic material for subsequent exclusion.
One may speculate that HIV may also eventually become endogenized into the human genome. There is some evidence that HIV can infect human germline cells and can be transmitted to the embryonic genome (Wang et al., 2011) . How long this may take is not known -10 generations?
The loss of function of ERVs can occur by mutations, deletions of the env or other genes and ultimately all coding genes by homologous recombination, leaving behind only one LTR. The number of retrovirus-like elements add up to about 450,000, corresponding to 8% of the human genome (Lander et al., 2001; Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). The promoter regions were analyzed for their contribution to cancer by activating neighboring genes -as a consequence of a former retrovirus infection. Indeed, activated cellular genes by "downstream promotion" were identified in animal studies with activation of the myc gene as one of many examples, leading to chronic, not acute development of cancer (Ott et al., 2013) . As a general mechanism for human cancer today the LTRs are, however, not identified as a major culprit. Most of the ERVs we find today have been integrated during evolution in introns or other regions where their presence is relatively harmless. Did the other ones result in death of the carriers which disappeared? The effects of LTRs on the expression levels of neighboring host genes was studied with the endogenous human virus, HERV-K, as a possible cause of cancer, but this appears not to be a general phenomenon (Broecker et al., 2016b) . As shown for the koalas, ERVs can confer immunity to viral infections (Feschotte and Gilbert, 2012) .
A related ERV, HERV-H, was shown to produce an RNA that keeps early embryonic cells pluripotent and even revert adult cells to regain pluripotency (Grow et al., 2015) . Thus, the role of ERVs may be more complex than we presently know.
Transposable elements and REs that lost the ability of cellular transmission by deletion of the coat protein majorly contribute to genetic complexity of host cells. They are "locked" inside the cells and are major drivers of the increase of genetic complexity (Cordaux and Batzer, 2009 ). One could speculate that these intracellular elements are replicationincompetent retroviruses lacking coats (Lander et al., 2001) . Bats transmit viruses such as Ebola and SARS coronavirus without suffering from disease (Beltz, 2018) . Even RNA viruses such as Bornaviruses have been shown to integrate by illegitimate reverse transcription, possibly also supplying immunity against superinfection (Katzourakis and Gifford, 2010) .
There are two prominent events that significantly contributed to the success of life and the formation of cells. Both of them are associated with gene reduction. This phenomenon may play a role for the evolution of viruses from autonomous to parasitic lifestyles. In the 1960s Lynn Margulis proposed an extracellular origin for mitochondria (Margulis, 1970 (Margulis, , 1993 ). An ancestral cell, perhaps an archaeon, was infected by an anaerobic bacterium, which gave rise to mitochondria. Similarly, cyanobacteria formed the chloroplasts in modern plant cells. Mitochondria arose around 1.45 billion years ago (BYA) (Embley and Martin, 2006) . Mitochondria and chloroplasts are the most striking examples for a change in lifestyle from autonomous bacteria to endosymbionts. This transition is often considered as extremely rare and a hallmark of evolution of life on our planet. However, there are many other obligate intracellular parasites such as Rickettsia, Chlamydia trachomatis, Coxiella burnetii (the causative agent of Q fever), Mycobacterium leprae, M. tuberculosis, and M. mycoides (Beare et al., 2006) .
The change of lifestyle of the endosymbionts in the two cases of mitochondria and chloroplasts is striking. Both of them drastically reduced their genetic make-up. Mitochondria contain less than 37 genes, left from the original about 3,000 genes. Is endogenization of retroviruses, the ERVs, which are integrated into germline cells, related to endosymbiosis? Are these endosymbionts models for the transition from autonomous lifestyle to a parasitic life-which may have taken place with viruses? A more recent typical example for a reductive evolution are Rickettsia. These bacteria were assumed for some time to be viruses because of their obligatory intracellular parasitic existence. Rickettsia have evolved from autonomously replicating bacteria. Reductive evolution of endosymbionts can yield bacteria with tiny genomes on the expense of autonomous extracellular life. Their genomes are 1.11 mio bp in length with about 834 protein-coding genes, and loss of 24% by reductive evolution (Ogata et al., 2001) . Rickettsia may have some relationship with cyanobacteria, which are considered as the major symbionts.
Can one speculate that viruses may have been autonomous entities initially? Viroids may have undergone transition from autonomy to parasites, just as shown for mitochondria, chloroplasts or Rickettsia? To which extent have viruses been autonomous and independent of cellular metabolisms originally -and contributed to the origin of cells? Could they only later have lost their autonomy and become parasitic?
Viruses are minimalistic in their composition and must have undergone stringent gene reductions (Flint, 2015) . How small can their genomes become? Most coding RNA viruses still contain regulatory elements, ncRNA at the 3 and 5 terminal regions for ribosomal entry, protein synthesis, transcriptional regulation, and others.
A subgroup of retroviruses is an interesting example in respect to simultaneous loss and gain of genetic information. The oncogenic retroviruses or tumorviruses can recombine with cellular genes which under the promoters of retroviruses can become oncogenes and drivers of cancer. About a hundred oncogenes have been selected for in the laboratories and studied over decades for understanding the molecular mechanisms of cancer. Selection for growth advantages of the host cells led to the discovery of the fastest growth-promoting oncogenes we know today, such as Ras, Raf, ErbB or Myc, which are in part successful targets for anticancer drugs (Moelling et al., 1984) .
These oncogenes were in most cases taken up by the retroviruses at the expense of structural (gag), replicating (pol) or envelope (env) genes, and are often expressed as fusion proteins with Gag. Thus, oncogenic retroviruses are obligatory intracellular defective viruses and were selected for in the laboratory by researchers for the oncogenes with the most potent growth promoting ability. They need the supply of replicatory genes in trans from co-infecting helper viruses to infect other cells (Flint, 2015) . Retroviruses are able to pick up cellular genes, transfer and integrate them into neighboring cells. Some strains of Rous sarcoma virus maintain replication competent when carrying the cell-derived src (for sarcoma) oncogene encoding a protein of 536 amino acids that apparently can fit into the retroviral particle along with the full-size viral genome (Broecker et al., 2016a) . Spatial reasons may have influenced the formation of oncogenic retroviruses and limited their size and thereby led to their defective phenotypes.
There are indications that the uncontrolled activity of (retro)transposons in germline cells can result in diseases such as male infertility -presumably by "error catastrophe, " caused by too many transposition events. In mammals, piRNAs tame transposon activity by means of the RNase H activity of PIWI proteins during spermatogenesis (Girard et al., 2006) .
Only a minority of viruses are pathogens; most of them do not cause diseases. On the contrary, they are most important as drivers of evolution, as transmitters of genetic material, as innovative agents. In particular, the RNA viruses are the most innovative ones. Some of them are pathogenic and dangerous, such as HIV or influenza virus, or viroids in plants. RNA viruses are able to change so rapidly that the host immune system is unable to counteract the infection. Pathogenicity arises when environmental conditions change, for instance, when a virus enters a new organism or species.
Increase of cellular complexity by viruses is an important feature of evolution. Such major evolutionary changes are recently taken as arguments against the evolutionary theory by Charles Darwin who considered gradual changes, small increments by mutations as the main basis for selection and evolution. New criticism is addressing this thinking, considering larger changes as evolutionary drivers. Such changes arise by many complex phenomena such as endosymbiosis, infection by prokaryotes, viruses and fungi, recombination of genes, HGT, infections, sex. Dramatic changes such as endosymbiosis or pathogen infections extend Darwin's concept of evolution.
There are numerous examples for the contribution of viruses to the evolution of life since at least as long as 550 MYA (Hayward, 2017) . But genetic noise through random mutations does not allow us to go back to the origin of life. It may not be impossible that the earliest compartment was indistinguishable, either a pre-cell or a pre-virus. By analogy one may speculate that at some point autonomous viruses gave up independence for an obligatory intracellular life -as has been described for mitochondria and chloroplasts but also intracellular bacteria such as Rickettsia. This speculation is based on the concept that early life must have started simple and with high genetic variability and then became more complex. But complexity can be given up for a less energy consuming lifestyle with small genomes and high speed of replication (Moelling, 2012 (Moelling, , 2013 . Therefore, the question may be repeated: "Are viruses our oldest ancestors?" Some fossil life can be partially reproduced in vitro by Spiegelman's Monster and Eigen's follow-up experiments, explaining the great surviving potential of simple ncRNA.
Viruses can be pathogens, but their recognition as primarily causing diseases is wrong. This notion is based on the history of viruses in medicine, as explained in a book entitled "Viruses: More Friends Than Foes" (Moelling, 2017) . The scenario described here focuses on viruses as drivers of evolution.
The early RNA world gained interest 20-30 years ago as evidenced by the references provided above. Surprisingly, there are scientists who still believe in the "pansperm hypothesis" and think that retroviruses are of extraterrestric origin (Steele et al., 2018) . The recent interest in the origin of life arose from the newly discovered exoplanets whose number increases daily -and which may be as numerous as 10 25 . Thus, pure statistics make some people believe that there is extraterrestrial life.
The extraterrestric life is mimicked in laboratories on Earth with many assumptions -perhaps this overview stimulates some thinking. The discussion presented here should be taken as concept about simple replicating and evolving entities possibly arising from different building blocks in other environments, with structure being more relevant than sequence. | What do ribozymes exhibit? | 1,186 | structural information by hairpin-loops that form hydrogen bonds between incomplete double strands, and loops free to interact with other molecules. | 4,077 |
1,689 | Chikungunya: A Potentially Emerging Epidemic?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2860491/
SHA: f7c3160bef4169d29e2a8bdd79dd6e9056d4774c
Authors: Thiboutot, Michelle M.; Kannan, Senthil; Kawalekar, Omkar U.; Shedlock, Devon J.; Khan, Amir S.; Sarangan, Gopalsamy; Srikanth, Padma; Weiner, David B.; Muthumani, Karuppiah
Date: 2010-04-27
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623
License: cc-by
Abstract: Chikungunya virus is a mosquito-borne emerging pathogen that has a major health impact in humans and causes fever disease, headache, rash, nausea, vomiting, myalgia, and arthralgia. Indigenous to tropical Africa, recent large outbreaks have been reported in parts of South East Asia and several of its neighboring islands in 2005–07 and in Europe in 2007. Furthermore, positive cases have been confirmed in the United States in travelers returning from known outbreak areas. Currently, there is no vaccine or antiviral treatment. With the threat of an emerging global pandemic, the peculiar problems associated with the more immediate and seasonal epidemics warrant the development of an effective vaccine. In this review, we summarize the evidence supporting these concepts.
Text: Chikungunya virus (CHIKV), a mosquito-borne pathogen listed by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) as a Category C Priority Pathogen that causes Chikungunya fever (CHIKF), has been spreading throughout Asia, Africa, and parts of Europe in recent times [1, 2, 3] . CHIKV is an arthropod-borne virus (arbovirus) and is transmitted to humans primarily by Aedes aegypti, the infamous yellow fever propagator [4, 5] . CHIKV infection is marked by severe joint pain, contorting its victims into unusual postures [6] . The disease gets its name from the Kimakonde vernacular language of Tanzania and Mozambique, and the word chikungunya means ''that which contorts or bends up'' and translates in Swahili to ''the illness of the bended walker'' [7, 8, 9] . In Africa, CHIKV is maintained in a sylvatic cycle among forest-dwelling Aedes spp. mosquitoes, wild primates, squirrels, birds, and rodents ( Figure 1 ) [10] . In Asia, the disease is vectored by Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus [11] . Transmission in Asia occurs in an urban cycle whereby the mosquito spreads the disease from an infected human to an uninfected human, following an epidemiological pattern similar to dengue fever [12] .
The 2005-2006 epidemic of CHIKV in La Reunion islands in the Indian Ocean, spurred the discovery of a new vector species, Ae. albopictus [5] . Wrecking over one-third of the island's population, this epidemic peaked its devastation between January and February 2006, when over 46,000 cases came into light every week, including 284 deaths [5, 13] . Ae. albopictus is common in urban areas of the United States and is already flourishing in 36 states, raising grave concerns to the immunologically naive populace of the United States [14] .
Accordingly, this review elaborately details the epidemiology and global expansion of CHIKV, describes its clinical features and pathogenesis and its symptoms and complications, and finally nominates a possible vaccine approach against CHIKV infection.
CHIKV has been isolated into three genotypes based on phylogenetic studies. These genotypes, based on the gene sequences of an Envelope protein (E1), are Asian, East/Central/ South African, and West African [4, 11, 15] . Using phylogenetic models, Cherian et al. estimate that the Asian genotype of CHIKV emerged between 50 and 310 y ago, and the West and East African genotypes diverged between 100 and 840 y ago [15] . Since then, CHIKV has come a long way, with several mutations incorporated, and has continued to wreak epidemics in several regions. Recent activities of CHIKV include the Indian epidemic in 2005-2006, which was followed by a sudden explosion of cases in 2007. An estimated 1.3 million people across 13 states were reported to be infected in India [12, 16] , and CHIKV was also widespread in Malaysia, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia [17] . In July-August of 2007, CHIKV was reported in Italy, probably brought in by travelers from CHIKV-prone regions of India, Africa, and Indian Ocean islands such as Mauritius, Madagascar, and Seychelles. Few of the Italian isolates were found to have evolved from the Kerala isolate, which was associated with a A226V shift in E1 gene that represents a successful evolutionary adaptation in the mosquito vector similar to the ones observed in Reunion Island [2, 18, 19] .
In recent times, with an increase in global travel, the risk for spreading CHIKV to non-endemic regions has heightened [1] . Several travelers have brought CHIKV home with them after visiting areas with actively infected populations [12, 20] . Such cases have been documented in European countries, Australia, Asia, and the United States [8, 21] . The United States has already reported at least twelve cases of travel-associated CHIKV, while France has reported 850 cases, and the United Kingdom 93 [8, 14] . Beyond this, CHIKV-infected travelers have also been diagnosed in Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, French Guiana, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Martinique, Norway, Switzerland, and Sri Lanka [21] . Some travelers were viremic, worrying public health officials about the spread of CHIKV to new areas [1, 8] .
The incubation time for CHIKV is relatively short, requiring only 2-6 d with symptoms usually appearing 4-7 d post-infection [22] . Vazeille et al. detected CHIKV in the salivary glands of Ae. albopictus only 2 d after infection [5] . Upon infection, CHIKF tends to present itself in two phases. The first stage is acute, while the second stage, experienced by most but not all, is persistent, causing disabling polyarthritis. Characteristics of the acute phase include an abrupt onset of fever, arthralgia, and in some cases, maculopapular rash [6, 23] . The acute phase causes such intense joint and muscular pain that makes movement very difficult and prostrates its victims [6, 20] .
Ninety-five percent of infected adults are symptomatic after infection, and of these, most become disabled for weeks to months as a result of decreased dexterity, loss of mobility, and delayed reaction. Eighteen months after disease onset, 40% of patients are found to still have anti-CHIKV IgM [6, 18, 23, 24] . The chronic stage of CHIKF is characterized by polyarthralgia that can last from weeks to years beyond the acute stage [6] . CHIKV has been shown to attack fibroblasts, explaining the involvement of muscles, joints, and skin connective tissues. The high number of nociceptive nerve endings found within the joints and muscle connective tissues can explain pain associated with CHIKF [25, 26] .
More than 50% of patients who suffer from severe CHIKF are over 65 y old, and more than 33% of them die. Most adults who suffer from severe CHIKF have underlying medical conditions [6, 24, 27] . The other group that is disproportionately affected by severe CHIKV is children. Other complications associated with CHIKV, from most common to least common, include respiratory failure, cardiovascular decompensation, meningoencephalitis, severe acute hepatitis, severe cutaneous effects, other central nervous system problems, and kidney failure [6, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 27] .
CHIKV undertakes a complex replication cycle upon host infection (Figure 2 ), which makes its genome susceptible to mutations [28, 29] . For instance, Ae. aegypti, responsible for epidemics in Kenya, Comoros, and Seychelles, carried CHIKV with an alanine in the 226 position of the E1 gene (E1-A226) [4, 18] . However, when the virus struck La Reunion Islands, a decline in population of Ae. aegypti, due to massive dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane usage and dearth of Ae. albopictus species' www.plosntds.org population, resulted in an ecological pressure, favoring replacement of alanine at position 226 with valine (E1-A226V) [5] . This mutation allowed CHIKV's secondary vector species, Ae. albopictus, to supplement Ae. aegypti as its primary vector [5] .
Within a year, the E1-A226V mutation was present in La Reunion Island, and Ae. albopictus apparently vectored the large epidemic infecting 34% of La Reunion Island's population [5] . All of the CHIKV strains isolated from Mayotte carried the E1-A226V mutation, and the mutation was also found in Madagascar in 2007 [5] . The E1-A226V mutation was not present at the beginning of the Indian Ocean Islands outbreak (before September 2005). However, more than 90% of later viral strains found there had incorporated the mutation (December-March 2006), indicating a genotype switch during the winter season [5, 18, 20] .
The E1-A226V mutation also enabled an increase in infectivity of Ae. albopictus when compared to its infectivity of Ae. aegypti [4, 11, 18, 30] , and with several factors taken together, Ae. albopictus has become the new preferred and more lethal vector for CHIKV [4, 5, 11] . In fact, Tsetsarkin et al. found that a Green Fluorescent Protein tagged E1-A226V virus was 100 times more infective to Ae. albopictus than it was to Ae. aegypti [4] . In all the Indian Ocean Islands, Ae. albopictus became the main vector for CHIKV within 1-2 y after CHIKV was introduced to the region [31] .
Of note is that Ae. aegypti has most likely been established in North America for over 300 y, while Ae. albopictus has been in many areas of the US, since 1985, primarily in Florida [32] and since then has expanded its range in the country. Reiskind et al. set out to determine if Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus mosquitoes captured in Florida were susceptible to CHIKV infection by a La Reunion isolate [32] . Each mosquito tested was highly susceptible to infection by a full-length infectious clone of the La Réunion Island isolate, CHIKV LR2006 OPY1 strain. Even though the Ae. albopictus strains were more susceptible to infection, overall ecology and differences in human biting patterns need to be studied further Characteristically, there are two rounds of translation: (+) sense genomic RNA (49S9 = 11.7 kb) acts directly as mRNA and is partially translated (59 end) to produce non-structural proteins (nsp's). These proteins are responsible for replication and formation of a complementary (2) strand, the template for further (+) strand synthesis. Subgenomic mRNA (26 S = 4.1 kb) replication occurs through the synthesis of full-length (2) intermediate RNA, which is regulated by nsp4 and p123 precursor in early infection and later by mature nsp's. Translation of the newly synthesized sub-genomic RNA results in production of structural proteins such as Capsid and protein E2-6k-E1 (from 39 end of genome). Assembly occurs at the cell surface, and the envelope is acquired as the virus buds from the cell and release and maturation almost simultaneous occurred. Replication occurs in the cytoplasm and is very rapid (,4 h) [28, 29] . doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g002 www.plosntds.org to gain a more accurate understanding of a potential CHIKV epidemic in the US [32] .
During the 7 d preceding birth, no human mother has been reported to transmit the disease vertically. However, about 50% of newborns delivered while the mother was infected with CHIKV contracted the disease from their mother, despite the method of delivery. Furthermore, there have been instances of CHIKV transmission from mother to fetus causing congenital illness and fetal death [33] .
During the 2005-2006 La Reunion Island outbreaks, Ramful et al. discovered that mothers could transmit CHIKV to their progeny during the perinatal period (Day 24 to Day +1) [33, 34] , and it is associated with a high degree of morbidity. By mean Day 4 of life, all of the neonates were symptomatic for CHIKV, exhibiting common CHIKF symptoms. Six neonates were confirmed to have contracted CHIKV and developed mengoencephalitis. Of those mothers who, during the La Reunion Island epidemic, were infected long before delivery, only three fetal deaths were reported [12, 33] . Ramful et al. theorized that motherto-child transmission most likely happens transplacentally shortly before delivery [33] . A similar study by Gerardin et al. reported nineteen cases of neonatal infection associated with intrapartum maternal viremia that progressed to develop encephalitis owing to vertical transmission from infected mothers [34] .
Clinical and epidemiological similarities with dengue fever make CHIKV diagnosis difficult, which may lead physicians to misdiagnose CHIKV as dengue fever; therefore, the incidence of CHIKV may actually be higher than currently believed (Table 1 ) [6, 12, 35] .
The amount of time elapsed since disease onset is the most critical parameter when choosing a diagnostic test. CHIKV can be detected and isolated by culturing with mosquito cells (C6/36), Vero cells (mammalian), or in mice [26] . However, this method can take at least a week and only achieves a high sensitivity during the viremic phase, which usually only lasts up to 48 h after the bite. Five days post-infection, the viral isolation approach has a low sensitivity but is still the preferred method for detecting the CHIKV strain [12, 26, 31, 35] . RT-PCR on the other hand is a faster and more sensitive method that can be used within the first week of disease onset [26] , and it is currently the most sensitive method for detecting and quantifying viral mRNA [4, 36] .
Classic serological detection, by assays such as ELISA [37] , immunofluorescence [5, 38] , complement binding, and haemagglutination inhibition [39] , constitutes the second diagnostic tool used for biological diagnosis of CHIKV infection. These proven techniques are useful for detection of Antigen in mosquitoes during epidemiological studies. These assays detect virus-specific IgM and IgG, however the sensitivity and specificity of these assays has been poorly characterized. Viral competence, or the potential of viral infection and transmission, is an important parameter that can be quantified by ELISA, viral culture, and PCR.
A study by Ng et al. showed biomarkers indicative of severe CHIKV infection [40] . They found decreased levels of RANTES and increased levels of Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and Interleukin-1b (IL-1b) that could be sued for CHIKV detection in patients as indicators of CHIKV-driven cytokine storm. Couderc et al. demonstrate another cytokine, type-I IFN, as a key player in the progression to CHIKV infection [26] . Using an IFN-a/b null mouse model, they demonstrated evidence of muscles, joints, and skin as privileged CHIKV targets, which is consistent with human pathology. Although Ng et al. concluded that RANTES levels were significantly suppressed in severe CHIKF patients [40] , interestingly, an increase in levels of RANTES has been observed in dengue infection [41] . Since the symptoms of CHIKF mimic those of dengue fever, results obtained from this study strongly suggest that RANTES could be a potential distinctive biomarker that differentiates between these two clinically similar diseases.
There are no approved antiviral treatments currently available for CHIKV [1, 3, 12, 42] . Currently, CHIKF is treated symptomatically, usually with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or steroids, bed rest, and fluids. Movement and mild exercise are thought to decrease stiffness and morning arthralgia, but heavy exercise may exacerbate rheumatic symptoms. Corticosteroids may be used in cases of debilitating chronic CHIKV infection. There is a debate about the appropriateness of chloroquine as treatment for unresolved, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugresistant arthritis [43] . A study showed that viral production was www.plosntds.org drastically reduced at 16 h post-infection after treatment with 100 mM dec-RVKR-cmk (Decanoyl-Arg-Val-Lys-Arg-chloromethylketone), a furine inhibitor [42, 44] . Chloroquine acted by raising the pH, blocking low pH-dependent entry of virus into the cell. It is important to note that dec-RVKR-cmk or chloroquine only inhibited viral spreading from cell to cell, not CHIKV replication once it had entered the cell [43] . However, most would agree that the best weapon against CHIKV is prevention. A live CHIKV vaccine developed by the United States reached phase II clinical trial encompassing 59 healthy volunteers [45] . Eight percent of the volunteers experienced transient arthralgia, while 98% of the volunteers had seroconversion [45] . However, live CHIKV vaccines are still questionable. One cannot discount the risk of a live vaccine possibly inducing chronic rheumatism. Also, there is the question as to whether widespread use among the public could trigger mosquito transmission or lead to chronic infection or viral reversion [1] .
An alternative approach would be to produce a chimeric vaccine against CHIKV. Wang et al. developed a chimeric alphavirus vaccine that is uniformly attenuated and does not cause reactogenicity in mice [3] . Three different versions of this vaccine were made using three different backbone vectors: Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (VEEV) attenuated vaccine strain T-83, naturally attenuated eastern equine encephalitis virus (EEEV), and attenuated Sindbis virus (SINV). In short, CHIKV structural proteins were engineered into the backbones of the aforementioned vaccines to produce the chimeras [3] . These chimeras were found to stimulate a strong humoral immunity, and even at doses of 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU, they did not trigger reactogenicity. When vaccinated mice were challenged with CHIKV, neither adult nor neonatal mice gained weight, had fever, or displayed signs of neurological illness. Upon comparison of the chimeras with the Army181/25 vaccine, the Army vaccine resulted in higher levels of viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice. Because the joints are known targets of CHIKV, Wang et al. noted their vaccine might avoid the negative reactogenic side effects of the Army vaccine. After being subcutaneously vaccinated with 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU of the chimeric vaccines, mice produced strong neutralizing antibody titers. The VEEV and EEEV chimeras yielded higher neutralizing antibody titers than the SINV chimera without being more virulent. On top of this, the VEEV and EEEV CHIKV chimeras seemed to be more immunogenic than the Army vaccine despite the chimeras' lower viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice [3] .
Tiwari et al. [46] adopted a different strategy using formalin inactivated CHIKV in combination with alhydrogel (Aluminum Hydroxide) as an adjuvant. This study clearly suggests that this vaccine elicits both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses in mice, providing its immunogenic potential. A recent study by Couderc et al. [47] showed passive immunization as a potential treatment for CHIKV infection. Using purified immunoglobulin extracted from convalescent CHIKV patients, they demonstrated effective neutralizing activity against CHIKV infection both in vitro and in vivo. This thereby establishes a potential preventive and therapeutic approach to combat CHIKV infection. Pathogenesis studies conducted with related alpha virus, like RRV, have shown the role of macrophages in persistence on infection [48] . They also demonstrated the role of RRV-specific CD8 T cells in clearing viral load in infected patients, thereby warranting similar investigations with CHIKV and the importance of investigating a cell-mediated immune response-based vaccine against CHIKV [49] .
There are always certain risks associated with live attenuated or inactivated viral vaccines [50] . One way to avoid these potential problems is to construct a consensus-based DNA vaccine. DNA based vaccines have an improved safety profile as compared to live or attenuated vaccines [51, 52] . A consequence of CHIKV's rapid evolution is difficulty in constructing a vaccine that will be able to Figure 3 . Levels of CHIKV-specific IgG in mice immunized with CHIKV vaccines. Each group of C57BL/6 mice (n = 5) was immunized with 12.5 mg of pVax1 control vector or CHIKV vaccine plasmids as indicated at 0 and 2 wk. Mice were bled 2 wk after each immunization, and each group's serum pool was diluted to 1:100 and 1:500 for reaction with specific vaccine constructs. Serum was incubated for 1 h at 37uC on 96-well plates coated with 2 mg/ml of respective CHIKV peptides, and antibody was detected using anti-mouse IgG-HRP and OD was measured at 405 nm. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g003 www.plosntds.org effectively protect large populations from multiple strains of the virus. One of the strengths of DNA consensus vaccines is its ability to induce cross-reactive immune responses against the three distinct phylogenetic groups of CHIKV. Also DNA-based vaccines can be produced more rapidly than protein-based vaccines.
Recently, Muthumani et al. constructed a vaccine that was shown to induce both humoral and cellular immunity in vivo in 3-4-wk-old female C57/BL6 mice [49] . These mice were immunized using an in vivo electroporation method to deliver the vaccine into the quadriceps muscle. The consensus construct was designed against E1, E2, and the core protein capsid. To design the construct, they aligned 21 sequences of CHIKV isolated between 1952 and 2006, using strains from differing countries, including La Reunion Island. The most common nucleotide among the sequences was chosen at each position to be used in the consensus construct, taking care not to alter the reading frame. They conducted codon and RNA optimization, added a strong Kozak sequence, and substituted signal peptide with an immunoglobulin E leader sequence to improve vaccine efficacy.
After immunizing the mice, spleens were harvested along with serum and tested to determine antibody titer. After three immunizations, consensus E1, E2, and C vaccines were shown to induce T-cell immune responses leading to strong IFN-c responses and proliferation in C57/BL6 mice. Furthermore, when compared with control mice, immunized mice had higher total IgG levels as well as higher anti-E1 specific, anti-E2 specific, and anti-C specific IgG antibodies, suggesting a strong humoral immune response ( Figure 3 ) and also specificity for the antigens encoded in the vaccine constructs ( Figure 4 ). Because of its promising results and the need for a safer vaccine, this consensus DNA vaccine deserves further investigation. Determining longevity of protective effects of the vaccine and persistence of antibody and IFN-c responses could be the next step of investigation. Challenged studies of immunized mice must also be carried out.
CHIKV mosquito-borne disease has caused massive outbreaks for at least half a century but is no longer confined to the www.plosntds.org developing nations. It began to encroach into the boundaries of the developing world. As a result, the NIAID has designated CHIKV as a Category C pathogen alongside the influenza and SARS-CoV viruses [3] . Realization of the potential severity of this disease is exigent; for instance, if used as a biological weapon, the world economy could be severely crippled; if enough members of the armed forces were to become infected during a military deployment, military operations could be significantly affected. Efforts to monitor the disease will only provide minimal warning in a global society, and steps to prevent the morbidity and mortality associated with pandemic are imperative [21, 31] . Despite the gravity of its infectious potency and the fear of it being a potential biological weapon, there is currently no vaccine for CHIKV infections. Live attenuated vaccine trials were carried out in 2000, but funding for the project was discontinued. Newer approaches such as DNA vaccines appear promising over conventional strategies like live attenuated or inactivated virus and thus call for further investigation. Recent advances such electroporation delivery and incorporation of adjuvants has boosted DNA vaccine efficacy [51, 53] . Despite the low antibody response to DNA vaccines, other numerous advantages have overshadowed these minor drawbacks (Table 2) , the most important one being the ability to induce both humoral and cellular immune responses [51, 54] .
Judging by recent success, such as the immunogenic construct developed by Muthumani et al., DNA vaccines could play a major role in combating CHIKV [49] . Vaccines are literally a critical component of CHIKV disease control and therefore research in this area is highly encouraged. The dramatic spread of dengue viruses (DENV) throughout tropical America since 1980 via the same vectors and human hosts underscores the risk to public health in the Americas. The adverse events associated with the current live vaccine are well documented [55] . Realizing these drawbacks, earnest efforts should be taken to develop new strategies to forestall further spread and complications. | What is CHIKV marked by? | 2,477 | severe joint pain, contorting its victims into unusual postures | 1,660 |
1,689 | Chikungunya: A Potentially Emerging Epidemic?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2860491/
SHA: f7c3160bef4169d29e2a8bdd79dd6e9056d4774c
Authors: Thiboutot, Michelle M.; Kannan, Senthil; Kawalekar, Omkar U.; Shedlock, Devon J.; Khan, Amir S.; Sarangan, Gopalsamy; Srikanth, Padma; Weiner, David B.; Muthumani, Karuppiah
Date: 2010-04-27
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623
License: cc-by
Abstract: Chikungunya virus is a mosquito-borne emerging pathogen that has a major health impact in humans and causes fever disease, headache, rash, nausea, vomiting, myalgia, and arthralgia. Indigenous to tropical Africa, recent large outbreaks have been reported in parts of South East Asia and several of its neighboring islands in 2005–07 and in Europe in 2007. Furthermore, positive cases have been confirmed in the United States in travelers returning from known outbreak areas. Currently, there is no vaccine or antiviral treatment. With the threat of an emerging global pandemic, the peculiar problems associated with the more immediate and seasonal epidemics warrant the development of an effective vaccine. In this review, we summarize the evidence supporting these concepts.
Text: Chikungunya virus (CHIKV), a mosquito-borne pathogen listed by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) as a Category C Priority Pathogen that causes Chikungunya fever (CHIKF), has been spreading throughout Asia, Africa, and parts of Europe in recent times [1, 2, 3] . CHIKV is an arthropod-borne virus (arbovirus) and is transmitted to humans primarily by Aedes aegypti, the infamous yellow fever propagator [4, 5] . CHIKV infection is marked by severe joint pain, contorting its victims into unusual postures [6] . The disease gets its name from the Kimakonde vernacular language of Tanzania and Mozambique, and the word chikungunya means ''that which contorts or bends up'' and translates in Swahili to ''the illness of the bended walker'' [7, 8, 9] . In Africa, CHIKV is maintained in a sylvatic cycle among forest-dwelling Aedes spp. mosquitoes, wild primates, squirrels, birds, and rodents ( Figure 1 ) [10] . In Asia, the disease is vectored by Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus [11] . Transmission in Asia occurs in an urban cycle whereby the mosquito spreads the disease from an infected human to an uninfected human, following an epidemiological pattern similar to dengue fever [12] .
The 2005-2006 epidemic of CHIKV in La Reunion islands in the Indian Ocean, spurred the discovery of a new vector species, Ae. albopictus [5] . Wrecking over one-third of the island's population, this epidemic peaked its devastation between January and February 2006, when over 46,000 cases came into light every week, including 284 deaths [5, 13] . Ae. albopictus is common in urban areas of the United States and is already flourishing in 36 states, raising grave concerns to the immunologically naive populace of the United States [14] .
Accordingly, this review elaborately details the epidemiology and global expansion of CHIKV, describes its clinical features and pathogenesis and its symptoms and complications, and finally nominates a possible vaccine approach against CHIKV infection.
CHIKV has been isolated into three genotypes based on phylogenetic studies. These genotypes, based on the gene sequences of an Envelope protein (E1), are Asian, East/Central/ South African, and West African [4, 11, 15] . Using phylogenetic models, Cherian et al. estimate that the Asian genotype of CHIKV emerged between 50 and 310 y ago, and the West and East African genotypes diverged between 100 and 840 y ago [15] . Since then, CHIKV has come a long way, with several mutations incorporated, and has continued to wreak epidemics in several regions. Recent activities of CHIKV include the Indian epidemic in 2005-2006, which was followed by a sudden explosion of cases in 2007. An estimated 1.3 million people across 13 states were reported to be infected in India [12, 16] , and CHIKV was also widespread in Malaysia, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia [17] . In July-August of 2007, CHIKV was reported in Italy, probably brought in by travelers from CHIKV-prone regions of India, Africa, and Indian Ocean islands such as Mauritius, Madagascar, and Seychelles. Few of the Italian isolates were found to have evolved from the Kerala isolate, which was associated with a A226V shift in E1 gene that represents a successful evolutionary adaptation in the mosquito vector similar to the ones observed in Reunion Island [2, 18, 19] .
In recent times, with an increase in global travel, the risk for spreading CHIKV to non-endemic regions has heightened [1] . Several travelers have brought CHIKV home with them after visiting areas with actively infected populations [12, 20] . Such cases have been documented in European countries, Australia, Asia, and the United States [8, 21] . The United States has already reported at least twelve cases of travel-associated CHIKV, while France has reported 850 cases, and the United Kingdom 93 [8, 14] . Beyond this, CHIKV-infected travelers have also been diagnosed in Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, French Guiana, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Martinique, Norway, Switzerland, and Sri Lanka [21] . Some travelers were viremic, worrying public health officials about the spread of CHIKV to new areas [1, 8] .
The incubation time for CHIKV is relatively short, requiring only 2-6 d with symptoms usually appearing 4-7 d post-infection [22] . Vazeille et al. detected CHIKV in the salivary glands of Ae. albopictus only 2 d after infection [5] . Upon infection, CHIKF tends to present itself in two phases. The first stage is acute, while the second stage, experienced by most but not all, is persistent, causing disabling polyarthritis. Characteristics of the acute phase include an abrupt onset of fever, arthralgia, and in some cases, maculopapular rash [6, 23] . The acute phase causes such intense joint and muscular pain that makes movement very difficult and prostrates its victims [6, 20] .
Ninety-five percent of infected adults are symptomatic after infection, and of these, most become disabled for weeks to months as a result of decreased dexterity, loss of mobility, and delayed reaction. Eighteen months after disease onset, 40% of patients are found to still have anti-CHIKV IgM [6, 18, 23, 24] . The chronic stage of CHIKF is characterized by polyarthralgia that can last from weeks to years beyond the acute stage [6] . CHIKV has been shown to attack fibroblasts, explaining the involvement of muscles, joints, and skin connective tissues. The high number of nociceptive nerve endings found within the joints and muscle connective tissues can explain pain associated with CHIKF [25, 26] .
More than 50% of patients who suffer from severe CHIKF are over 65 y old, and more than 33% of them die. Most adults who suffer from severe CHIKF have underlying medical conditions [6, 24, 27] . The other group that is disproportionately affected by severe CHIKV is children. Other complications associated with CHIKV, from most common to least common, include respiratory failure, cardiovascular decompensation, meningoencephalitis, severe acute hepatitis, severe cutaneous effects, other central nervous system problems, and kidney failure [6, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 27] .
CHIKV undertakes a complex replication cycle upon host infection (Figure 2 ), which makes its genome susceptible to mutations [28, 29] . For instance, Ae. aegypti, responsible for epidemics in Kenya, Comoros, and Seychelles, carried CHIKV with an alanine in the 226 position of the E1 gene (E1-A226) [4, 18] . However, when the virus struck La Reunion Islands, a decline in population of Ae. aegypti, due to massive dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane usage and dearth of Ae. albopictus species' www.plosntds.org population, resulted in an ecological pressure, favoring replacement of alanine at position 226 with valine (E1-A226V) [5] . This mutation allowed CHIKV's secondary vector species, Ae. albopictus, to supplement Ae. aegypti as its primary vector [5] .
Within a year, the E1-A226V mutation was present in La Reunion Island, and Ae. albopictus apparently vectored the large epidemic infecting 34% of La Reunion Island's population [5] . All of the CHIKV strains isolated from Mayotte carried the E1-A226V mutation, and the mutation was also found in Madagascar in 2007 [5] . The E1-A226V mutation was not present at the beginning of the Indian Ocean Islands outbreak (before September 2005). However, more than 90% of later viral strains found there had incorporated the mutation (December-March 2006), indicating a genotype switch during the winter season [5, 18, 20] .
The E1-A226V mutation also enabled an increase in infectivity of Ae. albopictus when compared to its infectivity of Ae. aegypti [4, 11, 18, 30] , and with several factors taken together, Ae. albopictus has become the new preferred and more lethal vector for CHIKV [4, 5, 11] . In fact, Tsetsarkin et al. found that a Green Fluorescent Protein tagged E1-A226V virus was 100 times more infective to Ae. albopictus than it was to Ae. aegypti [4] . In all the Indian Ocean Islands, Ae. albopictus became the main vector for CHIKV within 1-2 y after CHIKV was introduced to the region [31] .
Of note is that Ae. aegypti has most likely been established in North America for over 300 y, while Ae. albopictus has been in many areas of the US, since 1985, primarily in Florida [32] and since then has expanded its range in the country. Reiskind et al. set out to determine if Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus mosquitoes captured in Florida were susceptible to CHIKV infection by a La Reunion isolate [32] . Each mosquito tested was highly susceptible to infection by a full-length infectious clone of the La Réunion Island isolate, CHIKV LR2006 OPY1 strain. Even though the Ae. albopictus strains were more susceptible to infection, overall ecology and differences in human biting patterns need to be studied further Characteristically, there are two rounds of translation: (+) sense genomic RNA (49S9 = 11.7 kb) acts directly as mRNA and is partially translated (59 end) to produce non-structural proteins (nsp's). These proteins are responsible for replication and formation of a complementary (2) strand, the template for further (+) strand synthesis. Subgenomic mRNA (26 S = 4.1 kb) replication occurs through the synthesis of full-length (2) intermediate RNA, which is regulated by nsp4 and p123 precursor in early infection and later by mature nsp's. Translation of the newly synthesized sub-genomic RNA results in production of structural proteins such as Capsid and protein E2-6k-E1 (from 39 end of genome). Assembly occurs at the cell surface, and the envelope is acquired as the virus buds from the cell and release and maturation almost simultaneous occurred. Replication occurs in the cytoplasm and is very rapid (,4 h) [28, 29] . doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g002 www.plosntds.org to gain a more accurate understanding of a potential CHIKV epidemic in the US [32] .
During the 7 d preceding birth, no human mother has been reported to transmit the disease vertically. However, about 50% of newborns delivered while the mother was infected with CHIKV contracted the disease from their mother, despite the method of delivery. Furthermore, there have been instances of CHIKV transmission from mother to fetus causing congenital illness and fetal death [33] .
During the 2005-2006 La Reunion Island outbreaks, Ramful et al. discovered that mothers could transmit CHIKV to their progeny during the perinatal period (Day 24 to Day +1) [33, 34] , and it is associated with a high degree of morbidity. By mean Day 4 of life, all of the neonates were symptomatic for CHIKV, exhibiting common CHIKF symptoms. Six neonates were confirmed to have contracted CHIKV and developed mengoencephalitis. Of those mothers who, during the La Reunion Island epidemic, were infected long before delivery, only three fetal deaths were reported [12, 33] . Ramful et al. theorized that motherto-child transmission most likely happens transplacentally shortly before delivery [33] . A similar study by Gerardin et al. reported nineteen cases of neonatal infection associated with intrapartum maternal viremia that progressed to develop encephalitis owing to vertical transmission from infected mothers [34] .
Clinical and epidemiological similarities with dengue fever make CHIKV diagnosis difficult, which may lead physicians to misdiagnose CHIKV as dengue fever; therefore, the incidence of CHIKV may actually be higher than currently believed (Table 1 ) [6, 12, 35] .
The amount of time elapsed since disease onset is the most critical parameter when choosing a diagnostic test. CHIKV can be detected and isolated by culturing with mosquito cells (C6/36), Vero cells (mammalian), or in mice [26] . However, this method can take at least a week and only achieves a high sensitivity during the viremic phase, which usually only lasts up to 48 h after the bite. Five days post-infection, the viral isolation approach has a low sensitivity but is still the preferred method for detecting the CHIKV strain [12, 26, 31, 35] . RT-PCR on the other hand is a faster and more sensitive method that can be used within the first week of disease onset [26] , and it is currently the most sensitive method for detecting and quantifying viral mRNA [4, 36] .
Classic serological detection, by assays such as ELISA [37] , immunofluorescence [5, 38] , complement binding, and haemagglutination inhibition [39] , constitutes the second diagnostic tool used for biological diagnosis of CHIKV infection. These proven techniques are useful for detection of Antigen in mosquitoes during epidemiological studies. These assays detect virus-specific IgM and IgG, however the sensitivity and specificity of these assays has been poorly characterized. Viral competence, or the potential of viral infection and transmission, is an important parameter that can be quantified by ELISA, viral culture, and PCR.
A study by Ng et al. showed biomarkers indicative of severe CHIKV infection [40] . They found decreased levels of RANTES and increased levels of Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and Interleukin-1b (IL-1b) that could be sued for CHIKV detection in patients as indicators of CHIKV-driven cytokine storm. Couderc et al. demonstrate another cytokine, type-I IFN, as a key player in the progression to CHIKV infection [26] . Using an IFN-a/b null mouse model, they demonstrated evidence of muscles, joints, and skin as privileged CHIKV targets, which is consistent with human pathology. Although Ng et al. concluded that RANTES levels were significantly suppressed in severe CHIKF patients [40] , interestingly, an increase in levels of RANTES has been observed in dengue infection [41] . Since the symptoms of CHIKF mimic those of dengue fever, results obtained from this study strongly suggest that RANTES could be a potential distinctive biomarker that differentiates between these two clinically similar diseases.
There are no approved antiviral treatments currently available for CHIKV [1, 3, 12, 42] . Currently, CHIKF is treated symptomatically, usually with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or steroids, bed rest, and fluids. Movement and mild exercise are thought to decrease stiffness and morning arthralgia, but heavy exercise may exacerbate rheumatic symptoms. Corticosteroids may be used in cases of debilitating chronic CHIKV infection. There is a debate about the appropriateness of chloroquine as treatment for unresolved, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugresistant arthritis [43] . A study showed that viral production was www.plosntds.org drastically reduced at 16 h post-infection after treatment with 100 mM dec-RVKR-cmk (Decanoyl-Arg-Val-Lys-Arg-chloromethylketone), a furine inhibitor [42, 44] . Chloroquine acted by raising the pH, blocking low pH-dependent entry of virus into the cell. It is important to note that dec-RVKR-cmk or chloroquine only inhibited viral spreading from cell to cell, not CHIKV replication once it had entered the cell [43] . However, most would agree that the best weapon against CHIKV is prevention. A live CHIKV vaccine developed by the United States reached phase II clinical trial encompassing 59 healthy volunteers [45] . Eight percent of the volunteers experienced transient arthralgia, while 98% of the volunteers had seroconversion [45] . However, live CHIKV vaccines are still questionable. One cannot discount the risk of a live vaccine possibly inducing chronic rheumatism. Also, there is the question as to whether widespread use among the public could trigger mosquito transmission or lead to chronic infection or viral reversion [1] .
An alternative approach would be to produce a chimeric vaccine against CHIKV. Wang et al. developed a chimeric alphavirus vaccine that is uniformly attenuated and does not cause reactogenicity in mice [3] . Three different versions of this vaccine were made using three different backbone vectors: Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (VEEV) attenuated vaccine strain T-83, naturally attenuated eastern equine encephalitis virus (EEEV), and attenuated Sindbis virus (SINV). In short, CHIKV structural proteins were engineered into the backbones of the aforementioned vaccines to produce the chimeras [3] . These chimeras were found to stimulate a strong humoral immunity, and even at doses of 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU, they did not trigger reactogenicity. When vaccinated mice were challenged with CHIKV, neither adult nor neonatal mice gained weight, had fever, or displayed signs of neurological illness. Upon comparison of the chimeras with the Army181/25 vaccine, the Army vaccine resulted in higher levels of viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice. Because the joints are known targets of CHIKV, Wang et al. noted their vaccine might avoid the negative reactogenic side effects of the Army vaccine. After being subcutaneously vaccinated with 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU of the chimeric vaccines, mice produced strong neutralizing antibody titers. The VEEV and EEEV chimeras yielded higher neutralizing antibody titers than the SINV chimera without being more virulent. On top of this, the VEEV and EEEV CHIKV chimeras seemed to be more immunogenic than the Army vaccine despite the chimeras' lower viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice [3] .
Tiwari et al. [46] adopted a different strategy using formalin inactivated CHIKV in combination with alhydrogel (Aluminum Hydroxide) as an adjuvant. This study clearly suggests that this vaccine elicits both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses in mice, providing its immunogenic potential. A recent study by Couderc et al. [47] showed passive immunization as a potential treatment for CHIKV infection. Using purified immunoglobulin extracted from convalescent CHIKV patients, they demonstrated effective neutralizing activity against CHIKV infection both in vitro and in vivo. This thereby establishes a potential preventive and therapeutic approach to combat CHIKV infection. Pathogenesis studies conducted with related alpha virus, like RRV, have shown the role of macrophages in persistence on infection [48] . They also demonstrated the role of RRV-specific CD8 T cells in clearing viral load in infected patients, thereby warranting similar investigations with CHIKV and the importance of investigating a cell-mediated immune response-based vaccine against CHIKV [49] .
There are always certain risks associated with live attenuated or inactivated viral vaccines [50] . One way to avoid these potential problems is to construct a consensus-based DNA vaccine. DNA based vaccines have an improved safety profile as compared to live or attenuated vaccines [51, 52] . A consequence of CHIKV's rapid evolution is difficulty in constructing a vaccine that will be able to Figure 3 . Levels of CHIKV-specific IgG in mice immunized with CHIKV vaccines. Each group of C57BL/6 mice (n = 5) was immunized with 12.5 mg of pVax1 control vector or CHIKV vaccine plasmids as indicated at 0 and 2 wk. Mice were bled 2 wk after each immunization, and each group's serum pool was diluted to 1:100 and 1:500 for reaction with specific vaccine constructs. Serum was incubated for 1 h at 37uC on 96-well plates coated with 2 mg/ml of respective CHIKV peptides, and antibody was detected using anti-mouse IgG-HRP and OD was measured at 405 nm. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g003 www.plosntds.org effectively protect large populations from multiple strains of the virus. One of the strengths of DNA consensus vaccines is its ability to induce cross-reactive immune responses against the three distinct phylogenetic groups of CHIKV. Also DNA-based vaccines can be produced more rapidly than protein-based vaccines.
Recently, Muthumani et al. constructed a vaccine that was shown to induce both humoral and cellular immunity in vivo in 3-4-wk-old female C57/BL6 mice [49] . These mice were immunized using an in vivo electroporation method to deliver the vaccine into the quadriceps muscle. The consensus construct was designed against E1, E2, and the core protein capsid. To design the construct, they aligned 21 sequences of CHIKV isolated between 1952 and 2006, using strains from differing countries, including La Reunion Island. The most common nucleotide among the sequences was chosen at each position to be used in the consensus construct, taking care not to alter the reading frame. They conducted codon and RNA optimization, added a strong Kozak sequence, and substituted signal peptide with an immunoglobulin E leader sequence to improve vaccine efficacy.
After immunizing the mice, spleens were harvested along with serum and tested to determine antibody titer. After three immunizations, consensus E1, E2, and C vaccines were shown to induce T-cell immune responses leading to strong IFN-c responses and proliferation in C57/BL6 mice. Furthermore, when compared with control mice, immunized mice had higher total IgG levels as well as higher anti-E1 specific, anti-E2 specific, and anti-C specific IgG antibodies, suggesting a strong humoral immune response ( Figure 3 ) and also specificity for the antigens encoded in the vaccine constructs ( Figure 4 ). Because of its promising results and the need for a safer vaccine, this consensus DNA vaccine deserves further investigation. Determining longevity of protective effects of the vaccine and persistence of antibody and IFN-c responses could be the next step of investigation. Challenged studies of immunized mice must also be carried out.
CHIKV mosquito-borne disease has caused massive outbreaks for at least half a century but is no longer confined to the www.plosntds.org developing nations. It began to encroach into the boundaries of the developing world. As a result, the NIAID has designated CHIKV as a Category C pathogen alongside the influenza and SARS-CoV viruses [3] . Realization of the potential severity of this disease is exigent; for instance, if used as a biological weapon, the world economy could be severely crippled; if enough members of the armed forces were to become infected during a military deployment, military operations could be significantly affected. Efforts to monitor the disease will only provide minimal warning in a global society, and steps to prevent the morbidity and mortality associated with pandemic are imperative [21, 31] . Despite the gravity of its infectious potency and the fear of it being a potential biological weapon, there is currently no vaccine for CHIKV infections. Live attenuated vaccine trials were carried out in 2000, but funding for the project was discontinued. Newer approaches such as DNA vaccines appear promising over conventional strategies like live attenuated or inactivated virus and thus call for further investigation. Recent advances such electroporation delivery and incorporation of adjuvants has boosted DNA vaccine efficacy [51, 53] . Despite the low antibody response to DNA vaccines, other numerous advantages have overshadowed these minor drawbacks (Table 2) , the most important one being the ability to induce both humoral and cellular immune responses [51, 54] .
Judging by recent success, such as the immunogenic construct developed by Muthumani et al., DNA vaccines could play a major role in combating CHIKV [49] . Vaccines are literally a critical component of CHIKV disease control and therefore research in this area is highly encouraged. The dramatic spread of dengue viruses (DENV) throughout tropical America since 1980 via the same vectors and human hosts underscores the risk to public health in the Americas. The adverse events associated with the current live vaccine are well documented [55] . Realizing these drawbacks, earnest efforts should be taken to develop new strategies to forestall further spread and complications. | What does Chikungunya cause? | 2,471 | fever disease, headache, rash, nausea, vomiting, myalgia, and arthralgia | 516 |
1,689 | Chikungunya: A Potentially Emerging Epidemic?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2860491/
SHA: f7c3160bef4169d29e2a8bdd79dd6e9056d4774c
Authors: Thiboutot, Michelle M.; Kannan, Senthil; Kawalekar, Omkar U.; Shedlock, Devon J.; Khan, Amir S.; Sarangan, Gopalsamy; Srikanth, Padma; Weiner, David B.; Muthumani, Karuppiah
Date: 2010-04-27
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623
License: cc-by
Abstract: Chikungunya virus is a mosquito-borne emerging pathogen that has a major health impact in humans and causes fever disease, headache, rash, nausea, vomiting, myalgia, and arthralgia. Indigenous to tropical Africa, recent large outbreaks have been reported in parts of South East Asia and several of its neighboring islands in 2005–07 and in Europe in 2007. Furthermore, positive cases have been confirmed in the United States in travelers returning from known outbreak areas. Currently, there is no vaccine or antiviral treatment. With the threat of an emerging global pandemic, the peculiar problems associated with the more immediate and seasonal epidemics warrant the development of an effective vaccine. In this review, we summarize the evidence supporting these concepts.
Text: Chikungunya virus (CHIKV), a mosquito-borne pathogen listed by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) as a Category C Priority Pathogen that causes Chikungunya fever (CHIKF), has been spreading throughout Asia, Africa, and parts of Europe in recent times [1, 2, 3] . CHIKV is an arthropod-borne virus (arbovirus) and is transmitted to humans primarily by Aedes aegypti, the infamous yellow fever propagator [4, 5] . CHIKV infection is marked by severe joint pain, contorting its victims into unusual postures [6] . The disease gets its name from the Kimakonde vernacular language of Tanzania and Mozambique, and the word chikungunya means ''that which contorts or bends up'' and translates in Swahili to ''the illness of the bended walker'' [7, 8, 9] . In Africa, CHIKV is maintained in a sylvatic cycle among forest-dwelling Aedes spp. mosquitoes, wild primates, squirrels, birds, and rodents ( Figure 1 ) [10] . In Asia, the disease is vectored by Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus [11] . Transmission in Asia occurs in an urban cycle whereby the mosquito spreads the disease from an infected human to an uninfected human, following an epidemiological pattern similar to dengue fever [12] .
The 2005-2006 epidemic of CHIKV in La Reunion islands in the Indian Ocean, spurred the discovery of a new vector species, Ae. albopictus [5] . Wrecking over one-third of the island's population, this epidemic peaked its devastation between January and February 2006, when over 46,000 cases came into light every week, including 284 deaths [5, 13] . Ae. albopictus is common in urban areas of the United States and is already flourishing in 36 states, raising grave concerns to the immunologically naive populace of the United States [14] .
Accordingly, this review elaborately details the epidemiology and global expansion of CHIKV, describes its clinical features and pathogenesis and its symptoms and complications, and finally nominates a possible vaccine approach against CHIKV infection.
CHIKV has been isolated into three genotypes based on phylogenetic studies. These genotypes, based on the gene sequences of an Envelope protein (E1), are Asian, East/Central/ South African, and West African [4, 11, 15] . Using phylogenetic models, Cherian et al. estimate that the Asian genotype of CHIKV emerged between 50 and 310 y ago, and the West and East African genotypes diverged between 100 and 840 y ago [15] . Since then, CHIKV has come a long way, with several mutations incorporated, and has continued to wreak epidemics in several regions. Recent activities of CHIKV include the Indian epidemic in 2005-2006, which was followed by a sudden explosion of cases in 2007. An estimated 1.3 million people across 13 states were reported to be infected in India [12, 16] , and CHIKV was also widespread in Malaysia, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia [17] . In July-August of 2007, CHIKV was reported in Italy, probably brought in by travelers from CHIKV-prone regions of India, Africa, and Indian Ocean islands such as Mauritius, Madagascar, and Seychelles. Few of the Italian isolates were found to have evolved from the Kerala isolate, which was associated with a A226V shift in E1 gene that represents a successful evolutionary adaptation in the mosquito vector similar to the ones observed in Reunion Island [2, 18, 19] .
In recent times, with an increase in global travel, the risk for spreading CHIKV to non-endemic regions has heightened [1] . Several travelers have brought CHIKV home with them after visiting areas with actively infected populations [12, 20] . Such cases have been documented in European countries, Australia, Asia, and the United States [8, 21] . The United States has already reported at least twelve cases of travel-associated CHIKV, while France has reported 850 cases, and the United Kingdom 93 [8, 14] . Beyond this, CHIKV-infected travelers have also been diagnosed in Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, French Guiana, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Martinique, Norway, Switzerland, and Sri Lanka [21] . Some travelers were viremic, worrying public health officials about the spread of CHIKV to new areas [1, 8] .
The incubation time for CHIKV is relatively short, requiring only 2-6 d with symptoms usually appearing 4-7 d post-infection [22] . Vazeille et al. detected CHIKV in the salivary glands of Ae. albopictus only 2 d after infection [5] . Upon infection, CHIKF tends to present itself in two phases. The first stage is acute, while the second stage, experienced by most but not all, is persistent, causing disabling polyarthritis. Characteristics of the acute phase include an abrupt onset of fever, arthralgia, and in some cases, maculopapular rash [6, 23] . The acute phase causes such intense joint and muscular pain that makes movement very difficult and prostrates its victims [6, 20] .
Ninety-five percent of infected adults are symptomatic after infection, and of these, most become disabled for weeks to months as a result of decreased dexterity, loss of mobility, and delayed reaction. Eighteen months after disease onset, 40% of patients are found to still have anti-CHIKV IgM [6, 18, 23, 24] . The chronic stage of CHIKF is characterized by polyarthralgia that can last from weeks to years beyond the acute stage [6] . CHIKV has been shown to attack fibroblasts, explaining the involvement of muscles, joints, and skin connective tissues. The high number of nociceptive nerve endings found within the joints and muscle connective tissues can explain pain associated with CHIKF [25, 26] .
More than 50% of patients who suffer from severe CHIKF are over 65 y old, and more than 33% of them die. Most adults who suffer from severe CHIKF have underlying medical conditions [6, 24, 27] . The other group that is disproportionately affected by severe CHIKV is children. Other complications associated with CHIKV, from most common to least common, include respiratory failure, cardiovascular decompensation, meningoencephalitis, severe acute hepatitis, severe cutaneous effects, other central nervous system problems, and kidney failure [6, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 27] .
CHIKV undertakes a complex replication cycle upon host infection (Figure 2 ), which makes its genome susceptible to mutations [28, 29] . For instance, Ae. aegypti, responsible for epidemics in Kenya, Comoros, and Seychelles, carried CHIKV with an alanine in the 226 position of the E1 gene (E1-A226) [4, 18] . However, when the virus struck La Reunion Islands, a decline in population of Ae. aegypti, due to massive dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane usage and dearth of Ae. albopictus species' www.plosntds.org population, resulted in an ecological pressure, favoring replacement of alanine at position 226 with valine (E1-A226V) [5] . This mutation allowed CHIKV's secondary vector species, Ae. albopictus, to supplement Ae. aegypti as its primary vector [5] .
Within a year, the E1-A226V mutation was present in La Reunion Island, and Ae. albopictus apparently vectored the large epidemic infecting 34% of La Reunion Island's population [5] . All of the CHIKV strains isolated from Mayotte carried the E1-A226V mutation, and the mutation was also found in Madagascar in 2007 [5] . The E1-A226V mutation was not present at the beginning of the Indian Ocean Islands outbreak (before September 2005). However, more than 90% of later viral strains found there had incorporated the mutation (December-March 2006), indicating a genotype switch during the winter season [5, 18, 20] .
The E1-A226V mutation also enabled an increase in infectivity of Ae. albopictus when compared to its infectivity of Ae. aegypti [4, 11, 18, 30] , and with several factors taken together, Ae. albopictus has become the new preferred and more lethal vector for CHIKV [4, 5, 11] . In fact, Tsetsarkin et al. found that a Green Fluorescent Protein tagged E1-A226V virus was 100 times more infective to Ae. albopictus than it was to Ae. aegypti [4] . In all the Indian Ocean Islands, Ae. albopictus became the main vector for CHIKV within 1-2 y after CHIKV was introduced to the region [31] .
Of note is that Ae. aegypti has most likely been established in North America for over 300 y, while Ae. albopictus has been in many areas of the US, since 1985, primarily in Florida [32] and since then has expanded its range in the country. Reiskind et al. set out to determine if Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus mosquitoes captured in Florida were susceptible to CHIKV infection by a La Reunion isolate [32] . Each mosquito tested was highly susceptible to infection by a full-length infectious clone of the La Réunion Island isolate, CHIKV LR2006 OPY1 strain. Even though the Ae. albopictus strains were more susceptible to infection, overall ecology and differences in human biting patterns need to be studied further Characteristically, there are two rounds of translation: (+) sense genomic RNA (49S9 = 11.7 kb) acts directly as mRNA and is partially translated (59 end) to produce non-structural proteins (nsp's). These proteins are responsible for replication and formation of a complementary (2) strand, the template for further (+) strand synthesis. Subgenomic mRNA (26 S = 4.1 kb) replication occurs through the synthesis of full-length (2) intermediate RNA, which is regulated by nsp4 and p123 precursor in early infection and later by mature nsp's. Translation of the newly synthesized sub-genomic RNA results in production of structural proteins such as Capsid and protein E2-6k-E1 (from 39 end of genome). Assembly occurs at the cell surface, and the envelope is acquired as the virus buds from the cell and release and maturation almost simultaneous occurred. Replication occurs in the cytoplasm and is very rapid (,4 h) [28, 29] . doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g002 www.plosntds.org to gain a more accurate understanding of a potential CHIKV epidemic in the US [32] .
During the 7 d preceding birth, no human mother has been reported to transmit the disease vertically. However, about 50% of newborns delivered while the mother was infected with CHIKV contracted the disease from their mother, despite the method of delivery. Furthermore, there have been instances of CHIKV transmission from mother to fetus causing congenital illness and fetal death [33] .
During the 2005-2006 La Reunion Island outbreaks, Ramful et al. discovered that mothers could transmit CHIKV to their progeny during the perinatal period (Day 24 to Day +1) [33, 34] , and it is associated with a high degree of morbidity. By mean Day 4 of life, all of the neonates were symptomatic for CHIKV, exhibiting common CHIKF symptoms. Six neonates were confirmed to have contracted CHIKV and developed mengoencephalitis. Of those mothers who, during the La Reunion Island epidemic, were infected long before delivery, only three fetal deaths were reported [12, 33] . Ramful et al. theorized that motherto-child transmission most likely happens transplacentally shortly before delivery [33] . A similar study by Gerardin et al. reported nineteen cases of neonatal infection associated with intrapartum maternal viremia that progressed to develop encephalitis owing to vertical transmission from infected mothers [34] .
Clinical and epidemiological similarities with dengue fever make CHIKV diagnosis difficult, which may lead physicians to misdiagnose CHIKV as dengue fever; therefore, the incidence of CHIKV may actually be higher than currently believed (Table 1 ) [6, 12, 35] .
The amount of time elapsed since disease onset is the most critical parameter when choosing a diagnostic test. CHIKV can be detected and isolated by culturing with mosquito cells (C6/36), Vero cells (mammalian), or in mice [26] . However, this method can take at least a week and only achieves a high sensitivity during the viremic phase, which usually only lasts up to 48 h after the bite. Five days post-infection, the viral isolation approach has a low sensitivity but is still the preferred method for detecting the CHIKV strain [12, 26, 31, 35] . RT-PCR on the other hand is a faster and more sensitive method that can be used within the first week of disease onset [26] , and it is currently the most sensitive method for detecting and quantifying viral mRNA [4, 36] .
Classic serological detection, by assays such as ELISA [37] , immunofluorescence [5, 38] , complement binding, and haemagglutination inhibition [39] , constitutes the second diagnostic tool used for biological diagnosis of CHIKV infection. These proven techniques are useful for detection of Antigen in mosquitoes during epidemiological studies. These assays detect virus-specific IgM and IgG, however the sensitivity and specificity of these assays has been poorly characterized. Viral competence, or the potential of viral infection and transmission, is an important parameter that can be quantified by ELISA, viral culture, and PCR.
A study by Ng et al. showed biomarkers indicative of severe CHIKV infection [40] . They found decreased levels of RANTES and increased levels of Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and Interleukin-1b (IL-1b) that could be sued for CHIKV detection in patients as indicators of CHIKV-driven cytokine storm. Couderc et al. demonstrate another cytokine, type-I IFN, as a key player in the progression to CHIKV infection [26] . Using an IFN-a/b null mouse model, they demonstrated evidence of muscles, joints, and skin as privileged CHIKV targets, which is consistent with human pathology. Although Ng et al. concluded that RANTES levels were significantly suppressed in severe CHIKF patients [40] , interestingly, an increase in levels of RANTES has been observed in dengue infection [41] . Since the symptoms of CHIKF mimic those of dengue fever, results obtained from this study strongly suggest that RANTES could be a potential distinctive biomarker that differentiates between these two clinically similar diseases.
There are no approved antiviral treatments currently available for CHIKV [1, 3, 12, 42] . Currently, CHIKF is treated symptomatically, usually with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or steroids, bed rest, and fluids. Movement and mild exercise are thought to decrease stiffness and morning arthralgia, but heavy exercise may exacerbate rheumatic symptoms. Corticosteroids may be used in cases of debilitating chronic CHIKV infection. There is a debate about the appropriateness of chloroquine as treatment for unresolved, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugresistant arthritis [43] . A study showed that viral production was www.plosntds.org drastically reduced at 16 h post-infection after treatment with 100 mM dec-RVKR-cmk (Decanoyl-Arg-Val-Lys-Arg-chloromethylketone), a furine inhibitor [42, 44] . Chloroquine acted by raising the pH, blocking low pH-dependent entry of virus into the cell. It is important to note that dec-RVKR-cmk or chloroquine only inhibited viral spreading from cell to cell, not CHIKV replication once it had entered the cell [43] . However, most would agree that the best weapon against CHIKV is prevention. A live CHIKV vaccine developed by the United States reached phase II clinical trial encompassing 59 healthy volunteers [45] . Eight percent of the volunteers experienced transient arthralgia, while 98% of the volunteers had seroconversion [45] . However, live CHIKV vaccines are still questionable. One cannot discount the risk of a live vaccine possibly inducing chronic rheumatism. Also, there is the question as to whether widespread use among the public could trigger mosquito transmission or lead to chronic infection or viral reversion [1] .
An alternative approach would be to produce a chimeric vaccine against CHIKV. Wang et al. developed a chimeric alphavirus vaccine that is uniformly attenuated and does not cause reactogenicity in mice [3] . Three different versions of this vaccine were made using three different backbone vectors: Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (VEEV) attenuated vaccine strain T-83, naturally attenuated eastern equine encephalitis virus (EEEV), and attenuated Sindbis virus (SINV). In short, CHIKV structural proteins were engineered into the backbones of the aforementioned vaccines to produce the chimeras [3] . These chimeras were found to stimulate a strong humoral immunity, and even at doses of 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU, they did not trigger reactogenicity. When vaccinated mice were challenged with CHIKV, neither adult nor neonatal mice gained weight, had fever, or displayed signs of neurological illness. Upon comparison of the chimeras with the Army181/25 vaccine, the Army vaccine resulted in higher levels of viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice. Because the joints are known targets of CHIKV, Wang et al. noted their vaccine might avoid the negative reactogenic side effects of the Army vaccine. After being subcutaneously vaccinated with 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU of the chimeric vaccines, mice produced strong neutralizing antibody titers. The VEEV and EEEV chimeras yielded higher neutralizing antibody titers than the SINV chimera without being more virulent. On top of this, the VEEV and EEEV CHIKV chimeras seemed to be more immunogenic than the Army vaccine despite the chimeras' lower viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice [3] .
Tiwari et al. [46] adopted a different strategy using formalin inactivated CHIKV in combination with alhydrogel (Aluminum Hydroxide) as an adjuvant. This study clearly suggests that this vaccine elicits both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses in mice, providing its immunogenic potential. A recent study by Couderc et al. [47] showed passive immunization as a potential treatment for CHIKV infection. Using purified immunoglobulin extracted from convalescent CHIKV patients, they demonstrated effective neutralizing activity against CHIKV infection both in vitro and in vivo. This thereby establishes a potential preventive and therapeutic approach to combat CHIKV infection. Pathogenesis studies conducted with related alpha virus, like RRV, have shown the role of macrophages in persistence on infection [48] . They also demonstrated the role of RRV-specific CD8 T cells in clearing viral load in infected patients, thereby warranting similar investigations with CHIKV and the importance of investigating a cell-mediated immune response-based vaccine against CHIKV [49] .
There are always certain risks associated with live attenuated or inactivated viral vaccines [50] . One way to avoid these potential problems is to construct a consensus-based DNA vaccine. DNA based vaccines have an improved safety profile as compared to live or attenuated vaccines [51, 52] . A consequence of CHIKV's rapid evolution is difficulty in constructing a vaccine that will be able to Figure 3 . Levels of CHIKV-specific IgG in mice immunized with CHIKV vaccines. Each group of C57BL/6 mice (n = 5) was immunized with 12.5 mg of pVax1 control vector or CHIKV vaccine plasmids as indicated at 0 and 2 wk. Mice were bled 2 wk after each immunization, and each group's serum pool was diluted to 1:100 and 1:500 for reaction with specific vaccine constructs. Serum was incubated for 1 h at 37uC on 96-well plates coated with 2 mg/ml of respective CHIKV peptides, and antibody was detected using anti-mouse IgG-HRP and OD was measured at 405 nm. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g003 www.plosntds.org effectively protect large populations from multiple strains of the virus. One of the strengths of DNA consensus vaccines is its ability to induce cross-reactive immune responses against the three distinct phylogenetic groups of CHIKV. Also DNA-based vaccines can be produced more rapidly than protein-based vaccines.
Recently, Muthumani et al. constructed a vaccine that was shown to induce both humoral and cellular immunity in vivo in 3-4-wk-old female C57/BL6 mice [49] . These mice were immunized using an in vivo electroporation method to deliver the vaccine into the quadriceps muscle. The consensus construct was designed against E1, E2, and the core protein capsid. To design the construct, they aligned 21 sequences of CHIKV isolated between 1952 and 2006, using strains from differing countries, including La Reunion Island. The most common nucleotide among the sequences was chosen at each position to be used in the consensus construct, taking care not to alter the reading frame. They conducted codon and RNA optimization, added a strong Kozak sequence, and substituted signal peptide with an immunoglobulin E leader sequence to improve vaccine efficacy.
After immunizing the mice, spleens were harvested along with serum and tested to determine antibody titer. After three immunizations, consensus E1, E2, and C vaccines were shown to induce T-cell immune responses leading to strong IFN-c responses and proliferation in C57/BL6 mice. Furthermore, when compared with control mice, immunized mice had higher total IgG levels as well as higher anti-E1 specific, anti-E2 specific, and anti-C specific IgG antibodies, suggesting a strong humoral immune response ( Figure 3 ) and also specificity for the antigens encoded in the vaccine constructs ( Figure 4 ). Because of its promising results and the need for a safer vaccine, this consensus DNA vaccine deserves further investigation. Determining longevity of protective effects of the vaccine and persistence of antibody and IFN-c responses could be the next step of investigation. Challenged studies of immunized mice must also be carried out.
CHIKV mosquito-borne disease has caused massive outbreaks for at least half a century but is no longer confined to the www.plosntds.org developing nations. It began to encroach into the boundaries of the developing world. As a result, the NIAID has designated CHIKV as a Category C pathogen alongside the influenza and SARS-CoV viruses [3] . Realization of the potential severity of this disease is exigent; for instance, if used as a biological weapon, the world economy could be severely crippled; if enough members of the armed forces were to become infected during a military deployment, military operations could be significantly affected. Efforts to monitor the disease will only provide minimal warning in a global society, and steps to prevent the morbidity and mortality associated with pandemic are imperative [21, 31] . Despite the gravity of its infectious potency and the fear of it being a potential biological weapon, there is currently no vaccine for CHIKV infections. Live attenuated vaccine trials were carried out in 2000, but funding for the project was discontinued. Newer approaches such as DNA vaccines appear promising over conventional strategies like live attenuated or inactivated virus and thus call for further investigation. Recent advances such electroporation delivery and incorporation of adjuvants has boosted DNA vaccine efficacy [51, 53] . Despite the low antibody response to DNA vaccines, other numerous advantages have overshadowed these minor drawbacks (Table 2) , the most important one being the ability to induce both humoral and cellular immune responses [51, 54] .
Judging by recent success, such as the immunogenic construct developed by Muthumani et al., DNA vaccines could play a major role in combating CHIKV [49] . Vaccines are literally a critical component of CHIKV disease control and therefore research in this area is highly encouraged. The dramatic spread of dengue viruses (DENV) throughout tropical America since 1980 via the same vectors and human hosts underscores the risk to public health in the Americas. The adverse events associated with the current live vaccine are well documented [55] . Realizing these drawbacks, earnest efforts should be taken to develop new strategies to forestall further spread and complications. | What is Chikungunya virus? | 2,470 | a mosquito-borne emerging pathogen | 430 |
1,689 | Chikungunya: A Potentially Emerging Epidemic?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2860491/
SHA: f7c3160bef4169d29e2a8bdd79dd6e9056d4774c
Authors: Thiboutot, Michelle M.; Kannan, Senthil; Kawalekar, Omkar U.; Shedlock, Devon J.; Khan, Amir S.; Sarangan, Gopalsamy; Srikanth, Padma; Weiner, David B.; Muthumani, Karuppiah
Date: 2010-04-27
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623
License: cc-by
Abstract: Chikungunya virus is a mosquito-borne emerging pathogen that has a major health impact in humans and causes fever disease, headache, rash, nausea, vomiting, myalgia, and arthralgia. Indigenous to tropical Africa, recent large outbreaks have been reported in parts of South East Asia and several of its neighboring islands in 2005–07 and in Europe in 2007. Furthermore, positive cases have been confirmed in the United States in travelers returning from known outbreak areas. Currently, there is no vaccine or antiviral treatment. With the threat of an emerging global pandemic, the peculiar problems associated with the more immediate and seasonal epidemics warrant the development of an effective vaccine. In this review, we summarize the evidence supporting these concepts.
Text: Chikungunya virus (CHIKV), a mosquito-borne pathogen listed by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) as a Category C Priority Pathogen that causes Chikungunya fever (CHIKF), has been spreading throughout Asia, Africa, and parts of Europe in recent times [1, 2, 3] . CHIKV is an arthropod-borne virus (arbovirus) and is transmitted to humans primarily by Aedes aegypti, the infamous yellow fever propagator [4, 5] . CHIKV infection is marked by severe joint pain, contorting its victims into unusual postures [6] . The disease gets its name from the Kimakonde vernacular language of Tanzania and Mozambique, and the word chikungunya means ''that which contorts or bends up'' and translates in Swahili to ''the illness of the bended walker'' [7, 8, 9] . In Africa, CHIKV is maintained in a sylvatic cycle among forest-dwelling Aedes spp. mosquitoes, wild primates, squirrels, birds, and rodents ( Figure 1 ) [10] . In Asia, the disease is vectored by Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus [11] . Transmission in Asia occurs in an urban cycle whereby the mosquito spreads the disease from an infected human to an uninfected human, following an epidemiological pattern similar to dengue fever [12] .
The 2005-2006 epidemic of CHIKV in La Reunion islands in the Indian Ocean, spurred the discovery of a new vector species, Ae. albopictus [5] . Wrecking over one-third of the island's population, this epidemic peaked its devastation between January and February 2006, when over 46,000 cases came into light every week, including 284 deaths [5, 13] . Ae. albopictus is common in urban areas of the United States and is already flourishing in 36 states, raising grave concerns to the immunologically naive populace of the United States [14] .
Accordingly, this review elaborately details the epidemiology and global expansion of CHIKV, describes its clinical features and pathogenesis and its symptoms and complications, and finally nominates a possible vaccine approach against CHIKV infection.
CHIKV has been isolated into three genotypes based on phylogenetic studies. These genotypes, based on the gene sequences of an Envelope protein (E1), are Asian, East/Central/ South African, and West African [4, 11, 15] . Using phylogenetic models, Cherian et al. estimate that the Asian genotype of CHIKV emerged between 50 and 310 y ago, and the West and East African genotypes diverged between 100 and 840 y ago [15] . Since then, CHIKV has come a long way, with several mutations incorporated, and has continued to wreak epidemics in several regions. Recent activities of CHIKV include the Indian epidemic in 2005-2006, which was followed by a sudden explosion of cases in 2007. An estimated 1.3 million people across 13 states were reported to be infected in India [12, 16] , and CHIKV was also widespread in Malaysia, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia [17] . In July-August of 2007, CHIKV was reported in Italy, probably brought in by travelers from CHIKV-prone regions of India, Africa, and Indian Ocean islands such as Mauritius, Madagascar, and Seychelles. Few of the Italian isolates were found to have evolved from the Kerala isolate, which was associated with a A226V shift in E1 gene that represents a successful evolutionary adaptation in the mosquito vector similar to the ones observed in Reunion Island [2, 18, 19] .
In recent times, with an increase in global travel, the risk for spreading CHIKV to non-endemic regions has heightened [1] . Several travelers have brought CHIKV home with them after visiting areas with actively infected populations [12, 20] . Such cases have been documented in European countries, Australia, Asia, and the United States [8, 21] . The United States has already reported at least twelve cases of travel-associated CHIKV, while France has reported 850 cases, and the United Kingdom 93 [8, 14] . Beyond this, CHIKV-infected travelers have also been diagnosed in Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, French Guiana, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Martinique, Norway, Switzerland, and Sri Lanka [21] . Some travelers were viremic, worrying public health officials about the spread of CHIKV to new areas [1, 8] .
The incubation time for CHIKV is relatively short, requiring only 2-6 d with symptoms usually appearing 4-7 d post-infection [22] . Vazeille et al. detected CHIKV in the salivary glands of Ae. albopictus only 2 d after infection [5] . Upon infection, CHIKF tends to present itself in two phases. The first stage is acute, while the second stage, experienced by most but not all, is persistent, causing disabling polyarthritis. Characteristics of the acute phase include an abrupt onset of fever, arthralgia, and in some cases, maculopapular rash [6, 23] . The acute phase causes such intense joint and muscular pain that makes movement very difficult and prostrates its victims [6, 20] .
Ninety-five percent of infected adults are symptomatic after infection, and of these, most become disabled for weeks to months as a result of decreased dexterity, loss of mobility, and delayed reaction. Eighteen months after disease onset, 40% of patients are found to still have anti-CHIKV IgM [6, 18, 23, 24] . The chronic stage of CHIKF is characterized by polyarthralgia that can last from weeks to years beyond the acute stage [6] . CHIKV has been shown to attack fibroblasts, explaining the involvement of muscles, joints, and skin connective tissues. The high number of nociceptive nerve endings found within the joints and muscle connective tissues can explain pain associated with CHIKF [25, 26] .
More than 50% of patients who suffer from severe CHIKF are over 65 y old, and more than 33% of them die. Most adults who suffer from severe CHIKF have underlying medical conditions [6, 24, 27] . The other group that is disproportionately affected by severe CHIKV is children. Other complications associated with CHIKV, from most common to least common, include respiratory failure, cardiovascular decompensation, meningoencephalitis, severe acute hepatitis, severe cutaneous effects, other central nervous system problems, and kidney failure [6, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 27] .
CHIKV undertakes a complex replication cycle upon host infection (Figure 2 ), which makes its genome susceptible to mutations [28, 29] . For instance, Ae. aegypti, responsible for epidemics in Kenya, Comoros, and Seychelles, carried CHIKV with an alanine in the 226 position of the E1 gene (E1-A226) [4, 18] . However, when the virus struck La Reunion Islands, a decline in population of Ae. aegypti, due to massive dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane usage and dearth of Ae. albopictus species' www.plosntds.org population, resulted in an ecological pressure, favoring replacement of alanine at position 226 with valine (E1-A226V) [5] . This mutation allowed CHIKV's secondary vector species, Ae. albopictus, to supplement Ae. aegypti as its primary vector [5] .
Within a year, the E1-A226V mutation was present in La Reunion Island, and Ae. albopictus apparently vectored the large epidemic infecting 34% of La Reunion Island's population [5] . All of the CHIKV strains isolated from Mayotte carried the E1-A226V mutation, and the mutation was also found in Madagascar in 2007 [5] . The E1-A226V mutation was not present at the beginning of the Indian Ocean Islands outbreak (before September 2005). However, more than 90% of later viral strains found there had incorporated the mutation (December-March 2006), indicating a genotype switch during the winter season [5, 18, 20] .
The E1-A226V mutation also enabled an increase in infectivity of Ae. albopictus when compared to its infectivity of Ae. aegypti [4, 11, 18, 30] , and with several factors taken together, Ae. albopictus has become the new preferred and more lethal vector for CHIKV [4, 5, 11] . In fact, Tsetsarkin et al. found that a Green Fluorescent Protein tagged E1-A226V virus was 100 times more infective to Ae. albopictus than it was to Ae. aegypti [4] . In all the Indian Ocean Islands, Ae. albopictus became the main vector for CHIKV within 1-2 y after CHIKV was introduced to the region [31] .
Of note is that Ae. aegypti has most likely been established in North America for over 300 y, while Ae. albopictus has been in many areas of the US, since 1985, primarily in Florida [32] and since then has expanded its range in the country. Reiskind et al. set out to determine if Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus mosquitoes captured in Florida were susceptible to CHIKV infection by a La Reunion isolate [32] . Each mosquito tested was highly susceptible to infection by a full-length infectious clone of the La Réunion Island isolate, CHIKV LR2006 OPY1 strain. Even though the Ae. albopictus strains were more susceptible to infection, overall ecology and differences in human biting patterns need to be studied further Characteristically, there are two rounds of translation: (+) sense genomic RNA (49S9 = 11.7 kb) acts directly as mRNA and is partially translated (59 end) to produce non-structural proteins (nsp's). These proteins are responsible for replication and formation of a complementary (2) strand, the template for further (+) strand synthesis. Subgenomic mRNA (26 S = 4.1 kb) replication occurs through the synthesis of full-length (2) intermediate RNA, which is regulated by nsp4 and p123 precursor in early infection and later by mature nsp's. Translation of the newly synthesized sub-genomic RNA results in production of structural proteins such as Capsid and protein E2-6k-E1 (from 39 end of genome). Assembly occurs at the cell surface, and the envelope is acquired as the virus buds from the cell and release and maturation almost simultaneous occurred. Replication occurs in the cytoplasm and is very rapid (,4 h) [28, 29] . doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g002 www.plosntds.org to gain a more accurate understanding of a potential CHIKV epidemic in the US [32] .
During the 7 d preceding birth, no human mother has been reported to transmit the disease vertically. However, about 50% of newborns delivered while the mother was infected with CHIKV contracted the disease from their mother, despite the method of delivery. Furthermore, there have been instances of CHIKV transmission from mother to fetus causing congenital illness and fetal death [33] .
During the 2005-2006 La Reunion Island outbreaks, Ramful et al. discovered that mothers could transmit CHIKV to their progeny during the perinatal period (Day 24 to Day +1) [33, 34] , and it is associated with a high degree of morbidity. By mean Day 4 of life, all of the neonates were symptomatic for CHIKV, exhibiting common CHIKF symptoms. Six neonates were confirmed to have contracted CHIKV and developed mengoencephalitis. Of those mothers who, during the La Reunion Island epidemic, were infected long before delivery, only three fetal deaths were reported [12, 33] . Ramful et al. theorized that motherto-child transmission most likely happens transplacentally shortly before delivery [33] . A similar study by Gerardin et al. reported nineteen cases of neonatal infection associated with intrapartum maternal viremia that progressed to develop encephalitis owing to vertical transmission from infected mothers [34] .
Clinical and epidemiological similarities with dengue fever make CHIKV diagnosis difficult, which may lead physicians to misdiagnose CHIKV as dengue fever; therefore, the incidence of CHIKV may actually be higher than currently believed (Table 1 ) [6, 12, 35] .
The amount of time elapsed since disease onset is the most critical parameter when choosing a diagnostic test. CHIKV can be detected and isolated by culturing with mosquito cells (C6/36), Vero cells (mammalian), or in mice [26] . However, this method can take at least a week and only achieves a high sensitivity during the viremic phase, which usually only lasts up to 48 h after the bite. Five days post-infection, the viral isolation approach has a low sensitivity but is still the preferred method for detecting the CHIKV strain [12, 26, 31, 35] . RT-PCR on the other hand is a faster and more sensitive method that can be used within the first week of disease onset [26] , and it is currently the most sensitive method for detecting and quantifying viral mRNA [4, 36] .
Classic serological detection, by assays such as ELISA [37] , immunofluorescence [5, 38] , complement binding, and haemagglutination inhibition [39] , constitutes the second diagnostic tool used for biological diagnosis of CHIKV infection. These proven techniques are useful for detection of Antigen in mosquitoes during epidemiological studies. These assays detect virus-specific IgM and IgG, however the sensitivity and specificity of these assays has been poorly characterized. Viral competence, or the potential of viral infection and transmission, is an important parameter that can be quantified by ELISA, viral culture, and PCR.
A study by Ng et al. showed biomarkers indicative of severe CHIKV infection [40] . They found decreased levels of RANTES and increased levels of Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and Interleukin-1b (IL-1b) that could be sued for CHIKV detection in patients as indicators of CHIKV-driven cytokine storm. Couderc et al. demonstrate another cytokine, type-I IFN, as a key player in the progression to CHIKV infection [26] . Using an IFN-a/b null mouse model, they demonstrated evidence of muscles, joints, and skin as privileged CHIKV targets, which is consistent with human pathology. Although Ng et al. concluded that RANTES levels were significantly suppressed in severe CHIKF patients [40] , interestingly, an increase in levels of RANTES has been observed in dengue infection [41] . Since the symptoms of CHIKF mimic those of dengue fever, results obtained from this study strongly suggest that RANTES could be a potential distinctive biomarker that differentiates between these two clinically similar diseases.
There are no approved antiviral treatments currently available for CHIKV [1, 3, 12, 42] . Currently, CHIKF is treated symptomatically, usually with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or steroids, bed rest, and fluids. Movement and mild exercise are thought to decrease stiffness and morning arthralgia, but heavy exercise may exacerbate rheumatic symptoms. Corticosteroids may be used in cases of debilitating chronic CHIKV infection. There is a debate about the appropriateness of chloroquine as treatment for unresolved, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugresistant arthritis [43] . A study showed that viral production was www.plosntds.org drastically reduced at 16 h post-infection after treatment with 100 mM dec-RVKR-cmk (Decanoyl-Arg-Val-Lys-Arg-chloromethylketone), a furine inhibitor [42, 44] . Chloroquine acted by raising the pH, blocking low pH-dependent entry of virus into the cell. It is important to note that dec-RVKR-cmk or chloroquine only inhibited viral spreading from cell to cell, not CHIKV replication once it had entered the cell [43] . However, most would agree that the best weapon against CHIKV is prevention. A live CHIKV vaccine developed by the United States reached phase II clinical trial encompassing 59 healthy volunteers [45] . Eight percent of the volunteers experienced transient arthralgia, while 98% of the volunteers had seroconversion [45] . However, live CHIKV vaccines are still questionable. One cannot discount the risk of a live vaccine possibly inducing chronic rheumatism. Also, there is the question as to whether widespread use among the public could trigger mosquito transmission or lead to chronic infection or viral reversion [1] .
An alternative approach would be to produce a chimeric vaccine against CHIKV. Wang et al. developed a chimeric alphavirus vaccine that is uniformly attenuated and does not cause reactogenicity in mice [3] . Three different versions of this vaccine were made using three different backbone vectors: Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (VEEV) attenuated vaccine strain T-83, naturally attenuated eastern equine encephalitis virus (EEEV), and attenuated Sindbis virus (SINV). In short, CHIKV structural proteins were engineered into the backbones of the aforementioned vaccines to produce the chimeras [3] . These chimeras were found to stimulate a strong humoral immunity, and even at doses of 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU, they did not trigger reactogenicity. When vaccinated mice were challenged with CHIKV, neither adult nor neonatal mice gained weight, had fever, or displayed signs of neurological illness. Upon comparison of the chimeras with the Army181/25 vaccine, the Army vaccine resulted in higher levels of viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice. Because the joints are known targets of CHIKV, Wang et al. noted their vaccine might avoid the negative reactogenic side effects of the Army vaccine. After being subcutaneously vaccinated with 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU of the chimeric vaccines, mice produced strong neutralizing antibody titers. The VEEV and EEEV chimeras yielded higher neutralizing antibody titers than the SINV chimera without being more virulent. On top of this, the VEEV and EEEV CHIKV chimeras seemed to be more immunogenic than the Army vaccine despite the chimeras' lower viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice [3] .
Tiwari et al. [46] adopted a different strategy using formalin inactivated CHIKV in combination with alhydrogel (Aluminum Hydroxide) as an adjuvant. This study clearly suggests that this vaccine elicits both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses in mice, providing its immunogenic potential. A recent study by Couderc et al. [47] showed passive immunization as a potential treatment for CHIKV infection. Using purified immunoglobulin extracted from convalescent CHIKV patients, they demonstrated effective neutralizing activity against CHIKV infection both in vitro and in vivo. This thereby establishes a potential preventive and therapeutic approach to combat CHIKV infection. Pathogenesis studies conducted with related alpha virus, like RRV, have shown the role of macrophages in persistence on infection [48] . They also demonstrated the role of RRV-specific CD8 T cells in clearing viral load in infected patients, thereby warranting similar investigations with CHIKV and the importance of investigating a cell-mediated immune response-based vaccine against CHIKV [49] .
There are always certain risks associated with live attenuated or inactivated viral vaccines [50] . One way to avoid these potential problems is to construct a consensus-based DNA vaccine. DNA based vaccines have an improved safety profile as compared to live or attenuated vaccines [51, 52] . A consequence of CHIKV's rapid evolution is difficulty in constructing a vaccine that will be able to Figure 3 . Levels of CHIKV-specific IgG in mice immunized with CHIKV vaccines. Each group of C57BL/6 mice (n = 5) was immunized with 12.5 mg of pVax1 control vector or CHIKV vaccine plasmids as indicated at 0 and 2 wk. Mice were bled 2 wk after each immunization, and each group's serum pool was diluted to 1:100 and 1:500 for reaction with specific vaccine constructs. Serum was incubated for 1 h at 37uC on 96-well plates coated with 2 mg/ml of respective CHIKV peptides, and antibody was detected using anti-mouse IgG-HRP and OD was measured at 405 nm. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g003 www.plosntds.org effectively protect large populations from multiple strains of the virus. One of the strengths of DNA consensus vaccines is its ability to induce cross-reactive immune responses against the three distinct phylogenetic groups of CHIKV. Also DNA-based vaccines can be produced more rapidly than protein-based vaccines.
Recently, Muthumani et al. constructed a vaccine that was shown to induce both humoral and cellular immunity in vivo in 3-4-wk-old female C57/BL6 mice [49] . These mice were immunized using an in vivo electroporation method to deliver the vaccine into the quadriceps muscle. The consensus construct was designed against E1, E2, and the core protein capsid. To design the construct, they aligned 21 sequences of CHIKV isolated between 1952 and 2006, using strains from differing countries, including La Reunion Island. The most common nucleotide among the sequences was chosen at each position to be used in the consensus construct, taking care not to alter the reading frame. They conducted codon and RNA optimization, added a strong Kozak sequence, and substituted signal peptide with an immunoglobulin E leader sequence to improve vaccine efficacy.
After immunizing the mice, spleens were harvested along with serum and tested to determine antibody titer. After three immunizations, consensus E1, E2, and C vaccines were shown to induce T-cell immune responses leading to strong IFN-c responses and proliferation in C57/BL6 mice. Furthermore, when compared with control mice, immunized mice had higher total IgG levels as well as higher anti-E1 specific, anti-E2 specific, and anti-C specific IgG antibodies, suggesting a strong humoral immune response ( Figure 3 ) and also specificity for the antigens encoded in the vaccine constructs ( Figure 4 ). Because of its promising results and the need for a safer vaccine, this consensus DNA vaccine deserves further investigation. Determining longevity of protective effects of the vaccine and persistence of antibody and IFN-c responses could be the next step of investigation. Challenged studies of immunized mice must also be carried out.
CHIKV mosquito-borne disease has caused massive outbreaks for at least half a century but is no longer confined to the www.plosntds.org developing nations. It began to encroach into the boundaries of the developing world. As a result, the NIAID has designated CHIKV as a Category C pathogen alongside the influenza and SARS-CoV viruses [3] . Realization of the potential severity of this disease is exigent; for instance, if used as a biological weapon, the world economy could be severely crippled; if enough members of the armed forces were to become infected during a military deployment, military operations could be significantly affected. Efforts to monitor the disease will only provide minimal warning in a global society, and steps to prevent the morbidity and mortality associated with pandemic are imperative [21, 31] . Despite the gravity of its infectious potency and the fear of it being a potential biological weapon, there is currently no vaccine for CHIKV infections. Live attenuated vaccine trials were carried out in 2000, but funding for the project was discontinued. Newer approaches such as DNA vaccines appear promising over conventional strategies like live attenuated or inactivated virus and thus call for further investigation. Recent advances such electroporation delivery and incorporation of adjuvants has boosted DNA vaccine efficacy [51, 53] . Despite the low antibody response to DNA vaccines, other numerous advantages have overshadowed these minor drawbacks (Table 2) , the most important one being the ability to induce both humoral and cellular immune responses [51, 54] .
Judging by recent success, such as the immunogenic construct developed by Muthumani et al., DNA vaccines could play a major role in combating CHIKV [49] . Vaccines are literally a critical component of CHIKV disease control and therefore research in this area is highly encouraged. The dramatic spread of dengue viruses (DENV) throughout tropical America since 1980 via the same vectors and human hosts underscores the risk to public health in the Americas. The adverse events associated with the current live vaccine are well documented [55] . Realizing these drawbacks, earnest efforts should be taken to develop new strategies to forestall further spread and complications. | Is there a treatment? | 2,472 | Currently, there is no vaccine or antiviral treatmen | 884 |
1,689 | Chikungunya: A Potentially Emerging Epidemic?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2860491/
SHA: f7c3160bef4169d29e2a8bdd79dd6e9056d4774c
Authors: Thiboutot, Michelle M.; Kannan, Senthil; Kawalekar, Omkar U.; Shedlock, Devon J.; Khan, Amir S.; Sarangan, Gopalsamy; Srikanth, Padma; Weiner, David B.; Muthumani, Karuppiah
Date: 2010-04-27
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623
License: cc-by
Abstract: Chikungunya virus is a mosquito-borne emerging pathogen that has a major health impact in humans and causes fever disease, headache, rash, nausea, vomiting, myalgia, and arthralgia. Indigenous to tropical Africa, recent large outbreaks have been reported in parts of South East Asia and several of its neighboring islands in 2005–07 and in Europe in 2007. Furthermore, positive cases have been confirmed in the United States in travelers returning from known outbreak areas. Currently, there is no vaccine or antiviral treatment. With the threat of an emerging global pandemic, the peculiar problems associated with the more immediate and seasonal epidemics warrant the development of an effective vaccine. In this review, we summarize the evidence supporting these concepts.
Text: Chikungunya virus (CHIKV), a mosquito-borne pathogen listed by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) as a Category C Priority Pathogen that causes Chikungunya fever (CHIKF), has been spreading throughout Asia, Africa, and parts of Europe in recent times [1, 2, 3] . CHIKV is an arthropod-borne virus (arbovirus) and is transmitted to humans primarily by Aedes aegypti, the infamous yellow fever propagator [4, 5] . CHIKV infection is marked by severe joint pain, contorting its victims into unusual postures [6] . The disease gets its name from the Kimakonde vernacular language of Tanzania and Mozambique, and the word chikungunya means ''that which contorts or bends up'' and translates in Swahili to ''the illness of the bended walker'' [7, 8, 9] . In Africa, CHIKV is maintained in a sylvatic cycle among forest-dwelling Aedes spp. mosquitoes, wild primates, squirrels, birds, and rodents ( Figure 1 ) [10] . In Asia, the disease is vectored by Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus [11] . Transmission in Asia occurs in an urban cycle whereby the mosquito spreads the disease from an infected human to an uninfected human, following an epidemiological pattern similar to dengue fever [12] .
The 2005-2006 epidemic of CHIKV in La Reunion islands in the Indian Ocean, spurred the discovery of a new vector species, Ae. albopictus [5] . Wrecking over one-third of the island's population, this epidemic peaked its devastation between January and February 2006, when over 46,000 cases came into light every week, including 284 deaths [5, 13] . Ae. albopictus is common in urban areas of the United States and is already flourishing in 36 states, raising grave concerns to the immunologically naive populace of the United States [14] .
Accordingly, this review elaborately details the epidemiology and global expansion of CHIKV, describes its clinical features and pathogenesis and its symptoms and complications, and finally nominates a possible vaccine approach against CHIKV infection.
CHIKV has been isolated into three genotypes based on phylogenetic studies. These genotypes, based on the gene sequences of an Envelope protein (E1), are Asian, East/Central/ South African, and West African [4, 11, 15] . Using phylogenetic models, Cherian et al. estimate that the Asian genotype of CHIKV emerged between 50 and 310 y ago, and the West and East African genotypes diverged between 100 and 840 y ago [15] . Since then, CHIKV has come a long way, with several mutations incorporated, and has continued to wreak epidemics in several regions. Recent activities of CHIKV include the Indian epidemic in 2005-2006, which was followed by a sudden explosion of cases in 2007. An estimated 1.3 million people across 13 states were reported to be infected in India [12, 16] , and CHIKV was also widespread in Malaysia, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia [17] . In July-August of 2007, CHIKV was reported in Italy, probably brought in by travelers from CHIKV-prone regions of India, Africa, and Indian Ocean islands such as Mauritius, Madagascar, and Seychelles. Few of the Italian isolates were found to have evolved from the Kerala isolate, which was associated with a A226V shift in E1 gene that represents a successful evolutionary adaptation in the mosquito vector similar to the ones observed in Reunion Island [2, 18, 19] .
In recent times, with an increase in global travel, the risk for spreading CHIKV to non-endemic regions has heightened [1] . Several travelers have brought CHIKV home with them after visiting areas with actively infected populations [12, 20] . Such cases have been documented in European countries, Australia, Asia, and the United States [8, 21] . The United States has already reported at least twelve cases of travel-associated CHIKV, while France has reported 850 cases, and the United Kingdom 93 [8, 14] . Beyond this, CHIKV-infected travelers have also been diagnosed in Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, French Guiana, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Martinique, Norway, Switzerland, and Sri Lanka [21] . Some travelers were viremic, worrying public health officials about the spread of CHIKV to new areas [1, 8] .
The incubation time for CHIKV is relatively short, requiring only 2-6 d with symptoms usually appearing 4-7 d post-infection [22] . Vazeille et al. detected CHIKV in the salivary glands of Ae. albopictus only 2 d after infection [5] . Upon infection, CHIKF tends to present itself in two phases. The first stage is acute, while the second stage, experienced by most but not all, is persistent, causing disabling polyarthritis. Characteristics of the acute phase include an abrupt onset of fever, arthralgia, and in some cases, maculopapular rash [6, 23] . The acute phase causes such intense joint and muscular pain that makes movement very difficult and prostrates its victims [6, 20] .
Ninety-five percent of infected adults are symptomatic after infection, and of these, most become disabled for weeks to months as a result of decreased dexterity, loss of mobility, and delayed reaction. Eighteen months after disease onset, 40% of patients are found to still have anti-CHIKV IgM [6, 18, 23, 24] . The chronic stage of CHIKF is characterized by polyarthralgia that can last from weeks to years beyond the acute stage [6] . CHIKV has been shown to attack fibroblasts, explaining the involvement of muscles, joints, and skin connective tissues. The high number of nociceptive nerve endings found within the joints and muscle connective tissues can explain pain associated with CHIKF [25, 26] .
More than 50% of patients who suffer from severe CHIKF are over 65 y old, and more than 33% of them die. Most adults who suffer from severe CHIKF have underlying medical conditions [6, 24, 27] . The other group that is disproportionately affected by severe CHIKV is children. Other complications associated with CHIKV, from most common to least common, include respiratory failure, cardiovascular decompensation, meningoencephalitis, severe acute hepatitis, severe cutaneous effects, other central nervous system problems, and kidney failure [6, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 27] .
CHIKV undertakes a complex replication cycle upon host infection (Figure 2 ), which makes its genome susceptible to mutations [28, 29] . For instance, Ae. aegypti, responsible for epidemics in Kenya, Comoros, and Seychelles, carried CHIKV with an alanine in the 226 position of the E1 gene (E1-A226) [4, 18] . However, when the virus struck La Reunion Islands, a decline in population of Ae. aegypti, due to massive dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane usage and dearth of Ae. albopictus species' www.plosntds.org population, resulted in an ecological pressure, favoring replacement of alanine at position 226 with valine (E1-A226V) [5] . This mutation allowed CHIKV's secondary vector species, Ae. albopictus, to supplement Ae. aegypti as its primary vector [5] .
Within a year, the E1-A226V mutation was present in La Reunion Island, and Ae. albopictus apparently vectored the large epidemic infecting 34% of La Reunion Island's population [5] . All of the CHIKV strains isolated from Mayotte carried the E1-A226V mutation, and the mutation was also found in Madagascar in 2007 [5] . The E1-A226V mutation was not present at the beginning of the Indian Ocean Islands outbreak (before September 2005). However, more than 90% of later viral strains found there had incorporated the mutation (December-March 2006), indicating a genotype switch during the winter season [5, 18, 20] .
The E1-A226V mutation also enabled an increase in infectivity of Ae. albopictus when compared to its infectivity of Ae. aegypti [4, 11, 18, 30] , and with several factors taken together, Ae. albopictus has become the new preferred and more lethal vector for CHIKV [4, 5, 11] . In fact, Tsetsarkin et al. found that a Green Fluorescent Protein tagged E1-A226V virus was 100 times more infective to Ae. albopictus than it was to Ae. aegypti [4] . In all the Indian Ocean Islands, Ae. albopictus became the main vector for CHIKV within 1-2 y after CHIKV was introduced to the region [31] .
Of note is that Ae. aegypti has most likely been established in North America for over 300 y, while Ae. albopictus has been in many areas of the US, since 1985, primarily in Florida [32] and since then has expanded its range in the country. Reiskind et al. set out to determine if Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus mosquitoes captured in Florida were susceptible to CHIKV infection by a La Reunion isolate [32] . Each mosquito tested was highly susceptible to infection by a full-length infectious clone of the La Réunion Island isolate, CHIKV LR2006 OPY1 strain. Even though the Ae. albopictus strains were more susceptible to infection, overall ecology and differences in human biting patterns need to be studied further Characteristically, there are two rounds of translation: (+) sense genomic RNA (49S9 = 11.7 kb) acts directly as mRNA and is partially translated (59 end) to produce non-structural proteins (nsp's). These proteins are responsible for replication and formation of a complementary (2) strand, the template for further (+) strand synthesis. Subgenomic mRNA (26 S = 4.1 kb) replication occurs through the synthesis of full-length (2) intermediate RNA, which is regulated by nsp4 and p123 precursor in early infection and later by mature nsp's. Translation of the newly synthesized sub-genomic RNA results in production of structural proteins such as Capsid and protein E2-6k-E1 (from 39 end of genome). Assembly occurs at the cell surface, and the envelope is acquired as the virus buds from the cell and release and maturation almost simultaneous occurred. Replication occurs in the cytoplasm and is very rapid (,4 h) [28, 29] . doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g002 www.plosntds.org to gain a more accurate understanding of a potential CHIKV epidemic in the US [32] .
During the 7 d preceding birth, no human mother has been reported to transmit the disease vertically. However, about 50% of newborns delivered while the mother was infected with CHIKV contracted the disease from their mother, despite the method of delivery. Furthermore, there have been instances of CHIKV transmission from mother to fetus causing congenital illness and fetal death [33] .
During the 2005-2006 La Reunion Island outbreaks, Ramful et al. discovered that mothers could transmit CHIKV to their progeny during the perinatal period (Day 24 to Day +1) [33, 34] , and it is associated with a high degree of morbidity. By mean Day 4 of life, all of the neonates were symptomatic for CHIKV, exhibiting common CHIKF symptoms. Six neonates were confirmed to have contracted CHIKV and developed mengoencephalitis. Of those mothers who, during the La Reunion Island epidemic, were infected long before delivery, only three fetal deaths were reported [12, 33] . Ramful et al. theorized that motherto-child transmission most likely happens transplacentally shortly before delivery [33] . A similar study by Gerardin et al. reported nineteen cases of neonatal infection associated with intrapartum maternal viremia that progressed to develop encephalitis owing to vertical transmission from infected mothers [34] .
Clinical and epidemiological similarities with dengue fever make CHIKV diagnosis difficult, which may lead physicians to misdiagnose CHIKV as dengue fever; therefore, the incidence of CHIKV may actually be higher than currently believed (Table 1 ) [6, 12, 35] .
The amount of time elapsed since disease onset is the most critical parameter when choosing a diagnostic test. CHIKV can be detected and isolated by culturing with mosquito cells (C6/36), Vero cells (mammalian), or in mice [26] . However, this method can take at least a week and only achieves a high sensitivity during the viremic phase, which usually only lasts up to 48 h after the bite. Five days post-infection, the viral isolation approach has a low sensitivity but is still the preferred method for detecting the CHIKV strain [12, 26, 31, 35] . RT-PCR on the other hand is a faster and more sensitive method that can be used within the first week of disease onset [26] , and it is currently the most sensitive method for detecting and quantifying viral mRNA [4, 36] .
Classic serological detection, by assays such as ELISA [37] , immunofluorescence [5, 38] , complement binding, and haemagglutination inhibition [39] , constitutes the second diagnostic tool used for biological diagnosis of CHIKV infection. These proven techniques are useful for detection of Antigen in mosquitoes during epidemiological studies. These assays detect virus-specific IgM and IgG, however the sensitivity and specificity of these assays has been poorly characterized. Viral competence, or the potential of viral infection and transmission, is an important parameter that can be quantified by ELISA, viral culture, and PCR.
A study by Ng et al. showed biomarkers indicative of severe CHIKV infection [40] . They found decreased levels of RANTES and increased levels of Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and Interleukin-1b (IL-1b) that could be sued for CHIKV detection in patients as indicators of CHIKV-driven cytokine storm. Couderc et al. demonstrate another cytokine, type-I IFN, as a key player in the progression to CHIKV infection [26] . Using an IFN-a/b null mouse model, they demonstrated evidence of muscles, joints, and skin as privileged CHIKV targets, which is consistent with human pathology. Although Ng et al. concluded that RANTES levels were significantly suppressed in severe CHIKF patients [40] , interestingly, an increase in levels of RANTES has been observed in dengue infection [41] . Since the symptoms of CHIKF mimic those of dengue fever, results obtained from this study strongly suggest that RANTES could be a potential distinctive biomarker that differentiates between these two clinically similar diseases.
There are no approved antiviral treatments currently available for CHIKV [1, 3, 12, 42] . Currently, CHIKF is treated symptomatically, usually with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or steroids, bed rest, and fluids. Movement and mild exercise are thought to decrease stiffness and morning arthralgia, but heavy exercise may exacerbate rheumatic symptoms. Corticosteroids may be used in cases of debilitating chronic CHIKV infection. There is a debate about the appropriateness of chloroquine as treatment for unresolved, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugresistant arthritis [43] . A study showed that viral production was www.plosntds.org drastically reduced at 16 h post-infection after treatment with 100 mM dec-RVKR-cmk (Decanoyl-Arg-Val-Lys-Arg-chloromethylketone), a furine inhibitor [42, 44] . Chloroquine acted by raising the pH, blocking low pH-dependent entry of virus into the cell. It is important to note that dec-RVKR-cmk or chloroquine only inhibited viral spreading from cell to cell, not CHIKV replication once it had entered the cell [43] . However, most would agree that the best weapon against CHIKV is prevention. A live CHIKV vaccine developed by the United States reached phase II clinical trial encompassing 59 healthy volunteers [45] . Eight percent of the volunteers experienced transient arthralgia, while 98% of the volunteers had seroconversion [45] . However, live CHIKV vaccines are still questionable. One cannot discount the risk of a live vaccine possibly inducing chronic rheumatism. Also, there is the question as to whether widespread use among the public could trigger mosquito transmission or lead to chronic infection or viral reversion [1] .
An alternative approach would be to produce a chimeric vaccine against CHIKV. Wang et al. developed a chimeric alphavirus vaccine that is uniformly attenuated and does not cause reactogenicity in mice [3] . Three different versions of this vaccine were made using three different backbone vectors: Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (VEEV) attenuated vaccine strain T-83, naturally attenuated eastern equine encephalitis virus (EEEV), and attenuated Sindbis virus (SINV). In short, CHIKV structural proteins were engineered into the backbones of the aforementioned vaccines to produce the chimeras [3] . These chimeras were found to stimulate a strong humoral immunity, and even at doses of 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU, they did not trigger reactogenicity. When vaccinated mice were challenged with CHIKV, neither adult nor neonatal mice gained weight, had fever, or displayed signs of neurological illness. Upon comparison of the chimeras with the Army181/25 vaccine, the Army vaccine resulted in higher levels of viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice. Because the joints are known targets of CHIKV, Wang et al. noted their vaccine might avoid the negative reactogenic side effects of the Army vaccine. After being subcutaneously vaccinated with 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU of the chimeric vaccines, mice produced strong neutralizing antibody titers. The VEEV and EEEV chimeras yielded higher neutralizing antibody titers than the SINV chimera without being more virulent. On top of this, the VEEV and EEEV CHIKV chimeras seemed to be more immunogenic than the Army vaccine despite the chimeras' lower viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice [3] .
Tiwari et al. [46] adopted a different strategy using formalin inactivated CHIKV in combination with alhydrogel (Aluminum Hydroxide) as an adjuvant. This study clearly suggests that this vaccine elicits both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses in mice, providing its immunogenic potential. A recent study by Couderc et al. [47] showed passive immunization as a potential treatment for CHIKV infection. Using purified immunoglobulin extracted from convalescent CHIKV patients, they demonstrated effective neutralizing activity against CHIKV infection both in vitro and in vivo. This thereby establishes a potential preventive and therapeutic approach to combat CHIKV infection. Pathogenesis studies conducted with related alpha virus, like RRV, have shown the role of macrophages in persistence on infection [48] . They also demonstrated the role of RRV-specific CD8 T cells in clearing viral load in infected patients, thereby warranting similar investigations with CHIKV and the importance of investigating a cell-mediated immune response-based vaccine against CHIKV [49] .
There are always certain risks associated with live attenuated or inactivated viral vaccines [50] . One way to avoid these potential problems is to construct a consensus-based DNA vaccine. DNA based vaccines have an improved safety profile as compared to live or attenuated vaccines [51, 52] . A consequence of CHIKV's rapid evolution is difficulty in constructing a vaccine that will be able to Figure 3 . Levels of CHIKV-specific IgG in mice immunized with CHIKV vaccines. Each group of C57BL/6 mice (n = 5) was immunized with 12.5 mg of pVax1 control vector or CHIKV vaccine plasmids as indicated at 0 and 2 wk. Mice were bled 2 wk after each immunization, and each group's serum pool was diluted to 1:100 and 1:500 for reaction with specific vaccine constructs. Serum was incubated for 1 h at 37uC on 96-well plates coated with 2 mg/ml of respective CHIKV peptides, and antibody was detected using anti-mouse IgG-HRP and OD was measured at 405 nm. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g003 www.plosntds.org effectively protect large populations from multiple strains of the virus. One of the strengths of DNA consensus vaccines is its ability to induce cross-reactive immune responses against the three distinct phylogenetic groups of CHIKV. Also DNA-based vaccines can be produced more rapidly than protein-based vaccines.
Recently, Muthumani et al. constructed a vaccine that was shown to induce both humoral and cellular immunity in vivo in 3-4-wk-old female C57/BL6 mice [49] . These mice were immunized using an in vivo electroporation method to deliver the vaccine into the quadriceps muscle. The consensus construct was designed against E1, E2, and the core protein capsid. To design the construct, they aligned 21 sequences of CHIKV isolated between 1952 and 2006, using strains from differing countries, including La Reunion Island. The most common nucleotide among the sequences was chosen at each position to be used in the consensus construct, taking care not to alter the reading frame. They conducted codon and RNA optimization, added a strong Kozak sequence, and substituted signal peptide with an immunoglobulin E leader sequence to improve vaccine efficacy.
After immunizing the mice, spleens were harvested along with serum and tested to determine antibody titer. After three immunizations, consensus E1, E2, and C vaccines were shown to induce T-cell immune responses leading to strong IFN-c responses and proliferation in C57/BL6 mice. Furthermore, when compared with control mice, immunized mice had higher total IgG levels as well as higher anti-E1 specific, anti-E2 specific, and anti-C specific IgG antibodies, suggesting a strong humoral immune response ( Figure 3 ) and also specificity for the antigens encoded in the vaccine constructs ( Figure 4 ). Because of its promising results and the need for a safer vaccine, this consensus DNA vaccine deserves further investigation. Determining longevity of protective effects of the vaccine and persistence of antibody and IFN-c responses could be the next step of investigation. Challenged studies of immunized mice must also be carried out.
CHIKV mosquito-borne disease has caused massive outbreaks for at least half a century but is no longer confined to the www.plosntds.org developing nations. It began to encroach into the boundaries of the developing world. As a result, the NIAID has designated CHIKV as a Category C pathogen alongside the influenza and SARS-CoV viruses [3] . Realization of the potential severity of this disease is exigent; for instance, if used as a biological weapon, the world economy could be severely crippled; if enough members of the armed forces were to become infected during a military deployment, military operations could be significantly affected. Efforts to monitor the disease will only provide minimal warning in a global society, and steps to prevent the morbidity and mortality associated with pandemic are imperative [21, 31] . Despite the gravity of its infectious potency and the fear of it being a potential biological weapon, there is currently no vaccine for CHIKV infections. Live attenuated vaccine trials were carried out in 2000, but funding for the project was discontinued. Newer approaches such as DNA vaccines appear promising over conventional strategies like live attenuated or inactivated virus and thus call for further investigation. Recent advances such electroporation delivery and incorporation of adjuvants has boosted DNA vaccine efficacy [51, 53] . Despite the low antibody response to DNA vaccines, other numerous advantages have overshadowed these minor drawbacks (Table 2) , the most important one being the ability to induce both humoral and cellular immune responses [51, 54] .
Judging by recent success, such as the immunogenic construct developed by Muthumani et al., DNA vaccines could play a major role in combating CHIKV [49] . Vaccines are literally a critical component of CHIKV disease control and therefore research in this area is highly encouraged. The dramatic spread of dengue viruses (DENV) throughout tropical America since 1980 via the same vectors and human hosts underscores the risk to public health in the Americas. The adverse events associated with the current live vaccine are well documented [55] . Realizing these drawbacks, earnest efforts should be taken to develop new strategies to forestall further spread and complications. | What conclusion is drawn in this report? | 2,473 | With the threat of an emerging global pandemic, the peculiar problems associated with the more immediate and seasonal epidemics warrant the development of an effective vaccine. | 939 |
1,689 | Chikungunya: A Potentially Emerging Epidemic?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2860491/
SHA: f7c3160bef4169d29e2a8bdd79dd6e9056d4774c
Authors: Thiboutot, Michelle M.; Kannan, Senthil; Kawalekar, Omkar U.; Shedlock, Devon J.; Khan, Amir S.; Sarangan, Gopalsamy; Srikanth, Padma; Weiner, David B.; Muthumani, Karuppiah
Date: 2010-04-27
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623
License: cc-by
Abstract: Chikungunya virus is a mosquito-borne emerging pathogen that has a major health impact in humans and causes fever disease, headache, rash, nausea, vomiting, myalgia, and arthralgia. Indigenous to tropical Africa, recent large outbreaks have been reported in parts of South East Asia and several of its neighboring islands in 2005–07 and in Europe in 2007. Furthermore, positive cases have been confirmed in the United States in travelers returning from known outbreak areas. Currently, there is no vaccine or antiviral treatment. With the threat of an emerging global pandemic, the peculiar problems associated with the more immediate and seasonal epidemics warrant the development of an effective vaccine. In this review, we summarize the evidence supporting these concepts.
Text: Chikungunya virus (CHIKV), a mosquito-borne pathogen listed by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) as a Category C Priority Pathogen that causes Chikungunya fever (CHIKF), has been spreading throughout Asia, Africa, and parts of Europe in recent times [1, 2, 3] . CHIKV is an arthropod-borne virus (arbovirus) and is transmitted to humans primarily by Aedes aegypti, the infamous yellow fever propagator [4, 5] . CHIKV infection is marked by severe joint pain, contorting its victims into unusual postures [6] . The disease gets its name from the Kimakonde vernacular language of Tanzania and Mozambique, and the word chikungunya means ''that which contorts or bends up'' and translates in Swahili to ''the illness of the bended walker'' [7, 8, 9] . In Africa, CHIKV is maintained in a sylvatic cycle among forest-dwelling Aedes spp. mosquitoes, wild primates, squirrels, birds, and rodents ( Figure 1 ) [10] . In Asia, the disease is vectored by Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus [11] . Transmission in Asia occurs in an urban cycle whereby the mosquito spreads the disease from an infected human to an uninfected human, following an epidemiological pattern similar to dengue fever [12] .
The 2005-2006 epidemic of CHIKV in La Reunion islands in the Indian Ocean, spurred the discovery of a new vector species, Ae. albopictus [5] . Wrecking over one-third of the island's population, this epidemic peaked its devastation between January and February 2006, when over 46,000 cases came into light every week, including 284 deaths [5, 13] . Ae. albopictus is common in urban areas of the United States and is already flourishing in 36 states, raising grave concerns to the immunologically naive populace of the United States [14] .
Accordingly, this review elaborately details the epidemiology and global expansion of CHIKV, describes its clinical features and pathogenesis and its symptoms and complications, and finally nominates a possible vaccine approach against CHIKV infection.
CHIKV has been isolated into three genotypes based on phylogenetic studies. These genotypes, based on the gene sequences of an Envelope protein (E1), are Asian, East/Central/ South African, and West African [4, 11, 15] . Using phylogenetic models, Cherian et al. estimate that the Asian genotype of CHIKV emerged between 50 and 310 y ago, and the West and East African genotypes diverged between 100 and 840 y ago [15] . Since then, CHIKV has come a long way, with several mutations incorporated, and has continued to wreak epidemics in several regions. Recent activities of CHIKV include the Indian epidemic in 2005-2006, which was followed by a sudden explosion of cases in 2007. An estimated 1.3 million people across 13 states were reported to be infected in India [12, 16] , and CHIKV was also widespread in Malaysia, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia [17] . In July-August of 2007, CHIKV was reported in Italy, probably brought in by travelers from CHIKV-prone regions of India, Africa, and Indian Ocean islands such as Mauritius, Madagascar, and Seychelles. Few of the Italian isolates were found to have evolved from the Kerala isolate, which was associated with a A226V shift in E1 gene that represents a successful evolutionary adaptation in the mosquito vector similar to the ones observed in Reunion Island [2, 18, 19] .
In recent times, with an increase in global travel, the risk for spreading CHIKV to non-endemic regions has heightened [1] . Several travelers have brought CHIKV home with them after visiting areas with actively infected populations [12, 20] . Such cases have been documented in European countries, Australia, Asia, and the United States [8, 21] . The United States has already reported at least twelve cases of travel-associated CHIKV, while France has reported 850 cases, and the United Kingdom 93 [8, 14] . Beyond this, CHIKV-infected travelers have also been diagnosed in Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, French Guiana, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Martinique, Norway, Switzerland, and Sri Lanka [21] . Some travelers were viremic, worrying public health officials about the spread of CHIKV to new areas [1, 8] .
The incubation time for CHIKV is relatively short, requiring only 2-6 d with symptoms usually appearing 4-7 d post-infection [22] . Vazeille et al. detected CHIKV in the salivary glands of Ae. albopictus only 2 d after infection [5] . Upon infection, CHIKF tends to present itself in two phases. The first stage is acute, while the second stage, experienced by most but not all, is persistent, causing disabling polyarthritis. Characteristics of the acute phase include an abrupt onset of fever, arthralgia, and in some cases, maculopapular rash [6, 23] . The acute phase causes such intense joint and muscular pain that makes movement very difficult and prostrates its victims [6, 20] .
Ninety-five percent of infected adults are symptomatic after infection, and of these, most become disabled for weeks to months as a result of decreased dexterity, loss of mobility, and delayed reaction. Eighteen months after disease onset, 40% of patients are found to still have anti-CHIKV IgM [6, 18, 23, 24] . The chronic stage of CHIKF is characterized by polyarthralgia that can last from weeks to years beyond the acute stage [6] . CHIKV has been shown to attack fibroblasts, explaining the involvement of muscles, joints, and skin connective tissues. The high number of nociceptive nerve endings found within the joints and muscle connective tissues can explain pain associated with CHIKF [25, 26] .
More than 50% of patients who suffer from severe CHIKF are over 65 y old, and more than 33% of them die. Most adults who suffer from severe CHIKF have underlying medical conditions [6, 24, 27] . The other group that is disproportionately affected by severe CHIKV is children. Other complications associated with CHIKV, from most common to least common, include respiratory failure, cardiovascular decompensation, meningoencephalitis, severe acute hepatitis, severe cutaneous effects, other central nervous system problems, and kidney failure [6, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 27] .
CHIKV undertakes a complex replication cycle upon host infection (Figure 2 ), which makes its genome susceptible to mutations [28, 29] . For instance, Ae. aegypti, responsible for epidemics in Kenya, Comoros, and Seychelles, carried CHIKV with an alanine in the 226 position of the E1 gene (E1-A226) [4, 18] . However, when the virus struck La Reunion Islands, a decline in population of Ae. aegypti, due to massive dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane usage and dearth of Ae. albopictus species' www.plosntds.org population, resulted in an ecological pressure, favoring replacement of alanine at position 226 with valine (E1-A226V) [5] . This mutation allowed CHIKV's secondary vector species, Ae. albopictus, to supplement Ae. aegypti as its primary vector [5] .
Within a year, the E1-A226V mutation was present in La Reunion Island, and Ae. albopictus apparently vectored the large epidemic infecting 34% of La Reunion Island's population [5] . All of the CHIKV strains isolated from Mayotte carried the E1-A226V mutation, and the mutation was also found in Madagascar in 2007 [5] . The E1-A226V mutation was not present at the beginning of the Indian Ocean Islands outbreak (before September 2005). However, more than 90% of later viral strains found there had incorporated the mutation (December-March 2006), indicating a genotype switch during the winter season [5, 18, 20] .
The E1-A226V mutation also enabled an increase in infectivity of Ae. albopictus when compared to its infectivity of Ae. aegypti [4, 11, 18, 30] , and with several factors taken together, Ae. albopictus has become the new preferred and more lethal vector for CHIKV [4, 5, 11] . In fact, Tsetsarkin et al. found that a Green Fluorescent Protein tagged E1-A226V virus was 100 times more infective to Ae. albopictus than it was to Ae. aegypti [4] . In all the Indian Ocean Islands, Ae. albopictus became the main vector for CHIKV within 1-2 y after CHIKV was introduced to the region [31] .
Of note is that Ae. aegypti has most likely been established in North America for over 300 y, while Ae. albopictus has been in many areas of the US, since 1985, primarily in Florida [32] and since then has expanded its range in the country. Reiskind et al. set out to determine if Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus mosquitoes captured in Florida were susceptible to CHIKV infection by a La Reunion isolate [32] . Each mosquito tested was highly susceptible to infection by a full-length infectious clone of the La Réunion Island isolate, CHIKV LR2006 OPY1 strain. Even though the Ae. albopictus strains were more susceptible to infection, overall ecology and differences in human biting patterns need to be studied further Characteristically, there are two rounds of translation: (+) sense genomic RNA (49S9 = 11.7 kb) acts directly as mRNA and is partially translated (59 end) to produce non-structural proteins (nsp's). These proteins are responsible for replication and formation of a complementary (2) strand, the template for further (+) strand synthesis. Subgenomic mRNA (26 S = 4.1 kb) replication occurs through the synthesis of full-length (2) intermediate RNA, which is regulated by nsp4 and p123 precursor in early infection and later by mature nsp's. Translation of the newly synthesized sub-genomic RNA results in production of structural proteins such as Capsid and protein E2-6k-E1 (from 39 end of genome). Assembly occurs at the cell surface, and the envelope is acquired as the virus buds from the cell and release and maturation almost simultaneous occurred. Replication occurs in the cytoplasm and is very rapid (,4 h) [28, 29] . doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g002 www.plosntds.org to gain a more accurate understanding of a potential CHIKV epidemic in the US [32] .
During the 7 d preceding birth, no human mother has been reported to transmit the disease vertically. However, about 50% of newborns delivered while the mother was infected with CHIKV contracted the disease from their mother, despite the method of delivery. Furthermore, there have been instances of CHIKV transmission from mother to fetus causing congenital illness and fetal death [33] .
During the 2005-2006 La Reunion Island outbreaks, Ramful et al. discovered that mothers could transmit CHIKV to their progeny during the perinatal period (Day 24 to Day +1) [33, 34] , and it is associated with a high degree of morbidity. By mean Day 4 of life, all of the neonates were symptomatic for CHIKV, exhibiting common CHIKF symptoms. Six neonates were confirmed to have contracted CHIKV and developed mengoencephalitis. Of those mothers who, during the La Reunion Island epidemic, were infected long before delivery, only three fetal deaths were reported [12, 33] . Ramful et al. theorized that motherto-child transmission most likely happens transplacentally shortly before delivery [33] . A similar study by Gerardin et al. reported nineteen cases of neonatal infection associated with intrapartum maternal viremia that progressed to develop encephalitis owing to vertical transmission from infected mothers [34] .
Clinical and epidemiological similarities with dengue fever make CHIKV diagnosis difficult, which may lead physicians to misdiagnose CHIKV as dengue fever; therefore, the incidence of CHIKV may actually be higher than currently believed (Table 1 ) [6, 12, 35] .
The amount of time elapsed since disease onset is the most critical parameter when choosing a diagnostic test. CHIKV can be detected and isolated by culturing with mosquito cells (C6/36), Vero cells (mammalian), or in mice [26] . However, this method can take at least a week and only achieves a high sensitivity during the viremic phase, which usually only lasts up to 48 h after the bite. Five days post-infection, the viral isolation approach has a low sensitivity but is still the preferred method for detecting the CHIKV strain [12, 26, 31, 35] . RT-PCR on the other hand is a faster and more sensitive method that can be used within the first week of disease onset [26] , and it is currently the most sensitive method for detecting and quantifying viral mRNA [4, 36] .
Classic serological detection, by assays such as ELISA [37] , immunofluorescence [5, 38] , complement binding, and haemagglutination inhibition [39] , constitutes the second diagnostic tool used for biological diagnosis of CHIKV infection. These proven techniques are useful for detection of Antigen in mosquitoes during epidemiological studies. These assays detect virus-specific IgM and IgG, however the sensitivity and specificity of these assays has been poorly characterized. Viral competence, or the potential of viral infection and transmission, is an important parameter that can be quantified by ELISA, viral culture, and PCR.
A study by Ng et al. showed biomarkers indicative of severe CHIKV infection [40] . They found decreased levels of RANTES and increased levels of Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and Interleukin-1b (IL-1b) that could be sued for CHIKV detection in patients as indicators of CHIKV-driven cytokine storm. Couderc et al. demonstrate another cytokine, type-I IFN, as a key player in the progression to CHIKV infection [26] . Using an IFN-a/b null mouse model, they demonstrated evidence of muscles, joints, and skin as privileged CHIKV targets, which is consistent with human pathology. Although Ng et al. concluded that RANTES levels were significantly suppressed in severe CHIKF patients [40] , interestingly, an increase in levels of RANTES has been observed in dengue infection [41] . Since the symptoms of CHIKF mimic those of dengue fever, results obtained from this study strongly suggest that RANTES could be a potential distinctive biomarker that differentiates between these two clinically similar diseases.
There are no approved antiviral treatments currently available for CHIKV [1, 3, 12, 42] . Currently, CHIKF is treated symptomatically, usually with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or steroids, bed rest, and fluids. Movement and mild exercise are thought to decrease stiffness and morning arthralgia, but heavy exercise may exacerbate rheumatic symptoms. Corticosteroids may be used in cases of debilitating chronic CHIKV infection. There is a debate about the appropriateness of chloroquine as treatment for unresolved, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugresistant arthritis [43] . A study showed that viral production was www.plosntds.org drastically reduced at 16 h post-infection after treatment with 100 mM dec-RVKR-cmk (Decanoyl-Arg-Val-Lys-Arg-chloromethylketone), a furine inhibitor [42, 44] . Chloroquine acted by raising the pH, blocking low pH-dependent entry of virus into the cell. It is important to note that dec-RVKR-cmk or chloroquine only inhibited viral spreading from cell to cell, not CHIKV replication once it had entered the cell [43] . However, most would agree that the best weapon against CHIKV is prevention. A live CHIKV vaccine developed by the United States reached phase II clinical trial encompassing 59 healthy volunteers [45] . Eight percent of the volunteers experienced transient arthralgia, while 98% of the volunteers had seroconversion [45] . However, live CHIKV vaccines are still questionable. One cannot discount the risk of a live vaccine possibly inducing chronic rheumatism. Also, there is the question as to whether widespread use among the public could trigger mosquito transmission or lead to chronic infection or viral reversion [1] .
An alternative approach would be to produce a chimeric vaccine against CHIKV. Wang et al. developed a chimeric alphavirus vaccine that is uniformly attenuated and does not cause reactogenicity in mice [3] . Three different versions of this vaccine were made using three different backbone vectors: Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (VEEV) attenuated vaccine strain T-83, naturally attenuated eastern equine encephalitis virus (EEEV), and attenuated Sindbis virus (SINV). In short, CHIKV structural proteins were engineered into the backbones of the aforementioned vaccines to produce the chimeras [3] . These chimeras were found to stimulate a strong humoral immunity, and even at doses of 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU, they did not trigger reactogenicity. When vaccinated mice were challenged with CHIKV, neither adult nor neonatal mice gained weight, had fever, or displayed signs of neurological illness. Upon comparison of the chimeras with the Army181/25 vaccine, the Army vaccine resulted in higher levels of viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice. Because the joints are known targets of CHIKV, Wang et al. noted their vaccine might avoid the negative reactogenic side effects of the Army vaccine. After being subcutaneously vaccinated with 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU of the chimeric vaccines, mice produced strong neutralizing antibody titers. The VEEV and EEEV chimeras yielded higher neutralizing antibody titers than the SINV chimera without being more virulent. On top of this, the VEEV and EEEV CHIKV chimeras seemed to be more immunogenic than the Army vaccine despite the chimeras' lower viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice [3] .
Tiwari et al. [46] adopted a different strategy using formalin inactivated CHIKV in combination with alhydrogel (Aluminum Hydroxide) as an adjuvant. This study clearly suggests that this vaccine elicits both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses in mice, providing its immunogenic potential. A recent study by Couderc et al. [47] showed passive immunization as a potential treatment for CHIKV infection. Using purified immunoglobulin extracted from convalescent CHIKV patients, they demonstrated effective neutralizing activity against CHIKV infection both in vitro and in vivo. This thereby establishes a potential preventive and therapeutic approach to combat CHIKV infection. Pathogenesis studies conducted with related alpha virus, like RRV, have shown the role of macrophages in persistence on infection [48] . They also demonstrated the role of RRV-specific CD8 T cells in clearing viral load in infected patients, thereby warranting similar investigations with CHIKV and the importance of investigating a cell-mediated immune response-based vaccine against CHIKV [49] .
There are always certain risks associated with live attenuated or inactivated viral vaccines [50] . One way to avoid these potential problems is to construct a consensus-based DNA vaccine. DNA based vaccines have an improved safety profile as compared to live or attenuated vaccines [51, 52] . A consequence of CHIKV's rapid evolution is difficulty in constructing a vaccine that will be able to Figure 3 . Levels of CHIKV-specific IgG in mice immunized with CHIKV vaccines. Each group of C57BL/6 mice (n = 5) was immunized with 12.5 mg of pVax1 control vector or CHIKV vaccine plasmids as indicated at 0 and 2 wk. Mice were bled 2 wk after each immunization, and each group's serum pool was diluted to 1:100 and 1:500 for reaction with specific vaccine constructs. Serum was incubated for 1 h at 37uC on 96-well plates coated with 2 mg/ml of respective CHIKV peptides, and antibody was detected using anti-mouse IgG-HRP and OD was measured at 405 nm. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g003 www.plosntds.org effectively protect large populations from multiple strains of the virus. One of the strengths of DNA consensus vaccines is its ability to induce cross-reactive immune responses against the three distinct phylogenetic groups of CHIKV. Also DNA-based vaccines can be produced more rapidly than protein-based vaccines.
Recently, Muthumani et al. constructed a vaccine that was shown to induce both humoral and cellular immunity in vivo in 3-4-wk-old female C57/BL6 mice [49] . These mice were immunized using an in vivo electroporation method to deliver the vaccine into the quadriceps muscle. The consensus construct was designed against E1, E2, and the core protein capsid. To design the construct, they aligned 21 sequences of CHIKV isolated between 1952 and 2006, using strains from differing countries, including La Reunion Island. The most common nucleotide among the sequences was chosen at each position to be used in the consensus construct, taking care not to alter the reading frame. They conducted codon and RNA optimization, added a strong Kozak sequence, and substituted signal peptide with an immunoglobulin E leader sequence to improve vaccine efficacy.
After immunizing the mice, spleens were harvested along with serum and tested to determine antibody titer. After three immunizations, consensus E1, E2, and C vaccines were shown to induce T-cell immune responses leading to strong IFN-c responses and proliferation in C57/BL6 mice. Furthermore, when compared with control mice, immunized mice had higher total IgG levels as well as higher anti-E1 specific, anti-E2 specific, and anti-C specific IgG antibodies, suggesting a strong humoral immune response ( Figure 3 ) and also specificity for the antigens encoded in the vaccine constructs ( Figure 4 ). Because of its promising results and the need for a safer vaccine, this consensus DNA vaccine deserves further investigation. Determining longevity of protective effects of the vaccine and persistence of antibody and IFN-c responses could be the next step of investigation. Challenged studies of immunized mice must also be carried out.
CHIKV mosquito-borne disease has caused massive outbreaks for at least half a century but is no longer confined to the www.plosntds.org developing nations. It began to encroach into the boundaries of the developing world. As a result, the NIAID has designated CHIKV as a Category C pathogen alongside the influenza and SARS-CoV viruses [3] . Realization of the potential severity of this disease is exigent; for instance, if used as a biological weapon, the world economy could be severely crippled; if enough members of the armed forces were to become infected during a military deployment, military operations could be significantly affected. Efforts to monitor the disease will only provide minimal warning in a global society, and steps to prevent the morbidity and mortality associated with pandemic are imperative [21, 31] . Despite the gravity of its infectious potency and the fear of it being a potential biological weapon, there is currently no vaccine for CHIKV infections. Live attenuated vaccine trials were carried out in 2000, but funding for the project was discontinued. Newer approaches such as DNA vaccines appear promising over conventional strategies like live attenuated or inactivated virus and thus call for further investigation. Recent advances such electroporation delivery and incorporation of adjuvants has boosted DNA vaccine efficacy [51, 53] . Despite the low antibody response to DNA vaccines, other numerous advantages have overshadowed these minor drawbacks (Table 2) , the most important one being the ability to induce both humoral and cellular immune responses [51, 54] .
Judging by recent success, such as the immunogenic construct developed by Muthumani et al., DNA vaccines could play a major role in combating CHIKV [49] . Vaccines are literally a critical component of CHIKV disease control and therefore research in this area is highly encouraged. The dramatic spread of dengue viruses (DENV) throughout tropical America since 1980 via the same vectors and human hosts underscores the risk to public health in the Americas. The adverse events associated with the current live vaccine are well documented [55] . Realizing these drawbacks, earnest efforts should be taken to develop new strategies to forestall further spread and complications. | What is Chikungunya virus? | 2,474 | a mosquito-borne pathogen listed by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) as a Category C Priority Pathogen that causes Chikungunya fever (CHIKF) | 1,219 |
1,689 | Chikungunya: A Potentially Emerging Epidemic?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2860491/
SHA: f7c3160bef4169d29e2a8bdd79dd6e9056d4774c
Authors: Thiboutot, Michelle M.; Kannan, Senthil; Kawalekar, Omkar U.; Shedlock, Devon J.; Khan, Amir S.; Sarangan, Gopalsamy; Srikanth, Padma; Weiner, David B.; Muthumani, Karuppiah
Date: 2010-04-27
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623
License: cc-by
Abstract: Chikungunya virus is a mosquito-borne emerging pathogen that has a major health impact in humans and causes fever disease, headache, rash, nausea, vomiting, myalgia, and arthralgia. Indigenous to tropical Africa, recent large outbreaks have been reported in parts of South East Asia and several of its neighboring islands in 2005–07 and in Europe in 2007. Furthermore, positive cases have been confirmed in the United States in travelers returning from known outbreak areas. Currently, there is no vaccine or antiviral treatment. With the threat of an emerging global pandemic, the peculiar problems associated with the more immediate and seasonal epidemics warrant the development of an effective vaccine. In this review, we summarize the evidence supporting these concepts.
Text: Chikungunya virus (CHIKV), a mosquito-borne pathogen listed by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) as a Category C Priority Pathogen that causes Chikungunya fever (CHIKF), has been spreading throughout Asia, Africa, and parts of Europe in recent times [1, 2, 3] . CHIKV is an arthropod-borne virus (arbovirus) and is transmitted to humans primarily by Aedes aegypti, the infamous yellow fever propagator [4, 5] . CHIKV infection is marked by severe joint pain, contorting its victims into unusual postures [6] . The disease gets its name from the Kimakonde vernacular language of Tanzania and Mozambique, and the word chikungunya means ''that which contorts or bends up'' and translates in Swahili to ''the illness of the bended walker'' [7, 8, 9] . In Africa, CHIKV is maintained in a sylvatic cycle among forest-dwelling Aedes spp. mosquitoes, wild primates, squirrels, birds, and rodents ( Figure 1 ) [10] . In Asia, the disease is vectored by Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus [11] . Transmission in Asia occurs in an urban cycle whereby the mosquito spreads the disease from an infected human to an uninfected human, following an epidemiological pattern similar to dengue fever [12] .
The 2005-2006 epidemic of CHIKV in La Reunion islands in the Indian Ocean, spurred the discovery of a new vector species, Ae. albopictus [5] . Wrecking over one-third of the island's population, this epidemic peaked its devastation between January and February 2006, when over 46,000 cases came into light every week, including 284 deaths [5, 13] . Ae. albopictus is common in urban areas of the United States and is already flourishing in 36 states, raising grave concerns to the immunologically naive populace of the United States [14] .
Accordingly, this review elaborately details the epidemiology and global expansion of CHIKV, describes its clinical features and pathogenesis and its symptoms and complications, and finally nominates a possible vaccine approach against CHIKV infection.
CHIKV has been isolated into three genotypes based on phylogenetic studies. These genotypes, based on the gene sequences of an Envelope protein (E1), are Asian, East/Central/ South African, and West African [4, 11, 15] . Using phylogenetic models, Cherian et al. estimate that the Asian genotype of CHIKV emerged between 50 and 310 y ago, and the West and East African genotypes diverged between 100 and 840 y ago [15] . Since then, CHIKV has come a long way, with several mutations incorporated, and has continued to wreak epidemics in several regions. Recent activities of CHIKV include the Indian epidemic in 2005-2006, which was followed by a sudden explosion of cases in 2007. An estimated 1.3 million people across 13 states were reported to be infected in India [12, 16] , and CHIKV was also widespread in Malaysia, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia [17] . In July-August of 2007, CHIKV was reported in Italy, probably brought in by travelers from CHIKV-prone regions of India, Africa, and Indian Ocean islands such as Mauritius, Madagascar, and Seychelles. Few of the Italian isolates were found to have evolved from the Kerala isolate, which was associated with a A226V shift in E1 gene that represents a successful evolutionary adaptation in the mosquito vector similar to the ones observed in Reunion Island [2, 18, 19] .
In recent times, with an increase in global travel, the risk for spreading CHIKV to non-endemic regions has heightened [1] . Several travelers have brought CHIKV home with them after visiting areas with actively infected populations [12, 20] . Such cases have been documented in European countries, Australia, Asia, and the United States [8, 21] . The United States has already reported at least twelve cases of travel-associated CHIKV, while France has reported 850 cases, and the United Kingdom 93 [8, 14] . Beyond this, CHIKV-infected travelers have also been diagnosed in Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, French Guiana, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Martinique, Norway, Switzerland, and Sri Lanka [21] . Some travelers were viremic, worrying public health officials about the spread of CHIKV to new areas [1, 8] .
The incubation time for CHIKV is relatively short, requiring only 2-6 d with symptoms usually appearing 4-7 d post-infection [22] . Vazeille et al. detected CHIKV in the salivary glands of Ae. albopictus only 2 d after infection [5] . Upon infection, CHIKF tends to present itself in two phases. The first stage is acute, while the second stage, experienced by most but not all, is persistent, causing disabling polyarthritis. Characteristics of the acute phase include an abrupt onset of fever, arthralgia, and in some cases, maculopapular rash [6, 23] . The acute phase causes such intense joint and muscular pain that makes movement very difficult and prostrates its victims [6, 20] .
Ninety-five percent of infected adults are symptomatic after infection, and of these, most become disabled for weeks to months as a result of decreased dexterity, loss of mobility, and delayed reaction. Eighteen months after disease onset, 40% of patients are found to still have anti-CHIKV IgM [6, 18, 23, 24] . The chronic stage of CHIKF is characterized by polyarthralgia that can last from weeks to years beyond the acute stage [6] . CHIKV has been shown to attack fibroblasts, explaining the involvement of muscles, joints, and skin connective tissues. The high number of nociceptive nerve endings found within the joints and muscle connective tissues can explain pain associated with CHIKF [25, 26] .
More than 50% of patients who suffer from severe CHIKF are over 65 y old, and more than 33% of them die. Most adults who suffer from severe CHIKF have underlying medical conditions [6, 24, 27] . The other group that is disproportionately affected by severe CHIKV is children. Other complications associated with CHIKV, from most common to least common, include respiratory failure, cardiovascular decompensation, meningoencephalitis, severe acute hepatitis, severe cutaneous effects, other central nervous system problems, and kidney failure [6, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 27] .
CHIKV undertakes a complex replication cycle upon host infection (Figure 2 ), which makes its genome susceptible to mutations [28, 29] . For instance, Ae. aegypti, responsible for epidemics in Kenya, Comoros, and Seychelles, carried CHIKV with an alanine in the 226 position of the E1 gene (E1-A226) [4, 18] . However, when the virus struck La Reunion Islands, a decline in population of Ae. aegypti, due to massive dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane usage and dearth of Ae. albopictus species' www.plosntds.org population, resulted in an ecological pressure, favoring replacement of alanine at position 226 with valine (E1-A226V) [5] . This mutation allowed CHIKV's secondary vector species, Ae. albopictus, to supplement Ae. aegypti as its primary vector [5] .
Within a year, the E1-A226V mutation was present in La Reunion Island, and Ae. albopictus apparently vectored the large epidemic infecting 34% of La Reunion Island's population [5] . All of the CHIKV strains isolated from Mayotte carried the E1-A226V mutation, and the mutation was also found in Madagascar in 2007 [5] . The E1-A226V mutation was not present at the beginning of the Indian Ocean Islands outbreak (before September 2005). However, more than 90% of later viral strains found there had incorporated the mutation (December-March 2006), indicating a genotype switch during the winter season [5, 18, 20] .
The E1-A226V mutation also enabled an increase in infectivity of Ae. albopictus when compared to its infectivity of Ae. aegypti [4, 11, 18, 30] , and with several factors taken together, Ae. albopictus has become the new preferred and more lethal vector for CHIKV [4, 5, 11] . In fact, Tsetsarkin et al. found that a Green Fluorescent Protein tagged E1-A226V virus was 100 times more infective to Ae. albopictus than it was to Ae. aegypti [4] . In all the Indian Ocean Islands, Ae. albopictus became the main vector for CHIKV within 1-2 y after CHIKV was introduced to the region [31] .
Of note is that Ae. aegypti has most likely been established in North America for over 300 y, while Ae. albopictus has been in many areas of the US, since 1985, primarily in Florida [32] and since then has expanded its range in the country. Reiskind et al. set out to determine if Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus mosquitoes captured in Florida were susceptible to CHIKV infection by a La Reunion isolate [32] . Each mosquito tested was highly susceptible to infection by a full-length infectious clone of the La Réunion Island isolate, CHIKV LR2006 OPY1 strain. Even though the Ae. albopictus strains were more susceptible to infection, overall ecology and differences in human biting patterns need to be studied further Characteristically, there are two rounds of translation: (+) sense genomic RNA (49S9 = 11.7 kb) acts directly as mRNA and is partially translated (59 end) to produce non-structural proteins (nsp's). These proteins are responsible for replication and formation of a complementary (2) strand, the template for further (+) strand synthesis. Subgenomic mRNA (26 S = 4.1 kb) replication occurs through the synthesis of full-length (2) intermediate RNA, which is regulated by nsp4 and p123 precursor in early infection and later by mature nsp's. Translation of the newly synthesized sub-genomic RNA results in production of structural proteins such as Capsid and protein E2-6k-E1 (from 39 end of genome). Assembly occurs at the cell surface, and the envelope is acquired as the virus buds from the cell and release and maturation almost simultaneous occurred. Replication occurs in the cytoplasm and is very rapid (,4 h) [28, 29] . doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g002 www.plosntds.org to gain a more accurate understanding of a potential CHIKV epidemic in the US [32] .
During the 7 d preceding birth, no human mother has been reported to transmit the disease vertically. However, about 50% of newborns delivered while the mother was infected with CHIKV contracted the disease from their mother, despite the method of delivery. Furthermore, there have been instances of CHIKV transmission from mother to fetus causing congenital illness and fetal death [33] .
During the 2005-2006 La Reunion Island outbreaks, Ramful et al. discovered that mothers could transmit CHIKV to their progeny during the perinatal period (Day 24 to Day +1) [33, 34] , and it is associated with a high degree of morbidity. By mean Day 4 of life, all of the neonates were symptomatic for CHIKV, exhibiting common CHIKF symptoms. Six neonates were confirmed to have contracted CHIKV and developed mengoencephalitis. Of those mothers who, during the La Reunion Island epidemic, were infected long before delivery, only three fetal deaths were reported [12, 33] . Ramful et al. theorized that motherto-child transmission most likely happens transplacentally shortly before delivery [33] . A similar study by Gerardin et al. reported nineteen cases of neonatal infection associated with intrapartum maternal viremia that progressed to develop encephalitis owing to vertical transmission from infected mothers [34] .
Clinical and epidemiological similarities with dengue fever make CHIKV diagnosis difficult, which may lead physicians to misdiagnose CHIKV as dengue fever; therefore, the incidence of CHIKV may actually be higher than currently believed (Table 1 ) [6, 12, 35] .
The amount of time elapsed since disease onset is the most critical parameter when choosing a diagnostic test. CHIKV can be detected and isolated by culturing with mosquito cells (C6/36), Vero cells (mammalian), or in mice [26] . However, this method can take at least a week and only achieves a high sensitivity during the viremic phase, which usually only lasts up to 48 h after the bite. Five days post-infection, the viral isolation approach has a low sensitivity but is still the preferred method for detecting the CHIKV strain [12, 26, 31, 35] . RT-PCR on the other hand is a faster and more sensitive method that can be used within the first week of disease onset [26] , and it is currently the most sensitive method for detecting and quantifying viral mRNA [4, 36] .
Classic serological detection, by assays such as ELISA [37] , immunofluorescence [5, 38] , complement binding, and haemagglutination inhibition [39] , constitutes the second diagnostic tool used for biological diagnosis of CHIKV infection. These proven techniques are useful for detection of Antigen in mosquitoes during epidemiological studies. These assays detect virus-specific IgM and IgG, however the sensitivity and specificity of these assays has been poorly characterized. Viral competence, or the potential of viral infection and transmission, is an important parameter that can be quantified by ELISA, viral culture, and PCR.
A study by Ng et al. showed biomarkers indicative of severe CHIKV infection [40] . They found decreased levels of RANTES and increased levels of Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and Interleukin-1b (IL-1b) that could be sued for CHIKV detection in patients as indicators of CHIKV-driven cytokine storm. Couderc et al. demonstrate another cytokine, type-I IFN, as a key player in the progression to CHIKV infection [26] . Using an IFN-a/b null mouse model, they demonstrated evidence of muscles, joints, and skin as privileged CHIKV targets, which is consistent with human pathology. Although Ng et al. concluded that RANTES levels were significantly suppressed in severe CHIKF patients [40] , interestingly, an increase in levels of RANTES has been observed in dengue infection [41] . Since the symptoms of CHIKF mimic those of dengue fever, results obtained from this study strongly suggest that RANTES could be a potential distinctive biomarker that differentiates between these two clinically similar diseases.
There are no approved antiviral treatments currently available for CHIKV [1, 3, 12, 42] . Currently, CHIKF is treated symptomatically, usually with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or steroids, bed rest, and fluids. Movement and mild exercise are thought to decrease stiffness and morning arthralgia, but heavy exercise may exacerbate rheumatic symptoms. Corticosteroids may be used in cases of debilitating chronic CHIKV infection. There is a debate about the appropriateness of chloroquine as treatment for unresolved, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugresistant arthritis [43] . A study showed that viral production was www.plosntds.org drastically reduced at 16 h post-infection after treatment with 100 mM dec-RVKR-cmk (Decanoyl-Arg-Val-Lys-Arg-chloromethylketone), a furine inhibitor [42, 44] . Chloroquine acted by raising the pH, blocking low pH-dependent entry of virus into the cell. It is important to note that dec-RVKR-cmk or chloroquine only inhibited viral spreading from cell to cell, not CHIKV replication once it had entered the cell [43] . However, most would agree that the best weapon against CHIKV is prevention. A live CHIKV vaccine developed by the United States reached phase II clinical trial encompassing 59 healthy volunteers [45] . Eight percent of the volunteers experienced transient arthralgia, while 98% of the volunteers had seroconversion [45] . However, live CHIKV vaccines are still questionable. One cannot discount the risk of a live vaccine possibly inducing chronic rheumatism. Also, there is the question as to whether widespread use among the public could trigger mosquito transmission or lead to chronic infection or viral reversion [1] .
An alternative approach would be to produce a chimeric vaccine against CHIKV. Wang et al. developed a chimeric alphavirus vaccine that is uniformly attenuated and does not cause reactogenicity in mice [3] . Three different versions of this vaccine were made using three different backbone vectors: Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (VEEV) attenuated vaccine strain T-83, naturally attenuated eastern equine encephalitis virus (EEEV), and attenuated Sindbis virus (SINV). In short, CHIKV structural proteins were engineered into the backbones of the aforementioned vaccines to produce the chimeras [3] . These chimeras were found to stimulate a strong humoral immunity, and even at doses of 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU, they did not trigger reactogenicity. When vaccinated mice were challenged with CHIKV, neither adult nor neonatal mice gained weight, had fever, or displayed signs of neurological illness. Upon comparison of the chimeras with the Army181/25 vaccine, the Army vaccine resulted in higher levels of viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice. Because the joints are known targets of CHIKV, Wang et al. noted their vaccine might avoid the negative reactogenic side effects of the Army vaccine. After being subcutaneously vaccinated with 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU of the chimeric vaccines, mice produced strong neutralizing antibody titers. The VEEV and EEEV chimeras yielded higher neutralizing antibody titers than the SINV chimera without being more virulent. On top of this, the VEEV and EEEV CHIKV chimeras seemed to be more immunogenic than the Army vaccine despite the chimeras' lower viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice [3] .
Tiwari et al. [46] adopted a different strategy using formalin inactivated CHIKV in combination with alhydrogel (Aluminum Hydroxide) as an adjuvant. This study clearly suggests that this vaccine elicits both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses in mice, providing its immunogenic potential. A recent study by Couderc et al. [47] showed passive immunization as a potential treatment for CHIKV infection. Using purified immunoglobulin extracted from convalescent CHIKV patients, they demonstrated effective neutralizing activity against CHIKV infection both in vitro and in vivo. This thereby establishes a potential preventive and therapeutic approach to combat CHIKV infection. Pathogenesis studies conducted with related alpha virus, like RRV, have shown the role of macrophages in persistence on infection [48] . They also demonstrated the role of RRV-specific CD8 T cells in clearing viral load in infected patients, thereby warranting similar investigations with CHIKV and the importance of investigating a cell-mediated immune response-based vaccine against CHIKV [49] .
There are always certain risks associated with live attenuated or inactivated viral vaccines [50] . One way to avoid these potential problems is to construct a consensus-based DNA vaccine. DNA based vaccines have an improved safety profile as compared to live or attenuated vaccines [51, 52] . A consequence of CHIKV's rapid evolution is difficulty in constructing a vaccine that will be able to Figure 3 . Levels of CHIKV-specific IgG in mice immunized with CHIKV vaccines. Each group of C57BL/6 mice (n = 5) was immunized with 12.5 mg of pVax1 control vector or CHIKV vaccine plasmids as indicated at 0 and 2 wk. Mice were bled 2 wk after each immunization, and each group's serum pool was diluted to 1:100 and 1:500 for reaction with specific vaccine constructs. Serum was incubated for 1 h at 37uC on 96-well plates coated with 2 mg/ml of respective CHIKV peptides, and antibody was detected using anti-mouse IgG-HRP and OD was measured at 405 nm. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g003 www.plosntds.org effectively protect large populations from multiple strains of the virus. One of the strengths of DNA consensus vaccines is its ability to induce cross-reactive immune responses against the three distinct phylogenetic groups of CHIKV. Also DNA-based vaccines can be produced more rapidly than protein-based vaccines.
Recently, Muthumani et al. constructed a vaccine that was shown to induce both humoral and cellular immunity in vivo in 3-4-wk-old female C57/BL6 mice [49] . These mice were immunized using an in vivo electroporation method to deliver the vaccine into the quadriceps muscle. The consensus construct was designed against E1, E2, and the core protein capsid. To design the construct, they aligned 21 sequences of CHIKV isolated between 1952 and 2006, using strains from differing countries, including La Reunion Island. The most common nucleotide among the sequences was chosen at each position to be used in the consensus construct, taking care not to alter the reading frame. They conducted codon and RNA optimization, added a strong Kozak sequence, and substituted signal peptide with an immunoglobulin E leader sequence to improve vaccine efficacy.
After immunizing the mice, spleens were harvested along with serum and tested to determine antibody titer. After three immunizations, consensus E1, E2, and C vaccines were shown to induce T-cell immune responses leading to strong IFN-c responses and proliferation in C57/BL6 mice. Furthermore, when compared with control mice, immunized mice had higher total IgG levels as well as higher anti-E1 specific, anti-E2 specific, and anti-C specific IgG antibodies, suggesting a strong humoral immune response ( Figure 3 ) and also specificity for the antigens encoded in the vaccine constructs ( Figure 4 ). Because of its promising results and the need for a safer vaccine, this consensus DNA vaccine deserves further investigation. Determining longevity of protective effects of the vaccine and persistence of antibody and IFN-c responses could be the next step of investigation. Challenged studies of immunized mice must also be carried out.
CHIKV mosquito-borne disease has caused massive outbreaks for at least half a century but is no longer confined to the www.plosntds.org developing nations. It began to encroach into the boundaries of the developing world. As a result, the NIAID has designated CHIKV as a Category C pathogen alongside the influenza and SARS-CoV viruses [3] . Realization of the potential severity of this disease is exigent; for instance, if used as a biological weapon, the world economy could be severely crippled; if enough members of the armed forces were to become infected during a military deployment, military operations could be significantly affected. Efforts to monitor the disease will only provide minimal warning in a global society, and steps to prevent the morbidity and mortality associated with pandemic are imperative [21, 31] . Despite the gravity of its infectious potency and the fear of it being a potential biological weapon, there is currently no vaccine for CHIKV infections. Live attenuated vaccine trials were carried out in 2000, but funding for the project was discontinued. Newer approaches such as DNA vaccines appear promising over conventional strategies like live attenuated or inactivated virus and thus call for further investigation. Recent advances such electroporation delivery and incorporation of adjuvants has boosted DNA vaccine efficacy [51, 53] . Despite the low antibody response to DNA vaccines, other numerous advantages have overshadowed these minor drawbacks (Table 2) , the most important one being the ability to induce both humoral and cellular immune responses [51, 54] .
Judging by recent success, such as the immunogenic construct developed by Muthumani et al., DNA vaccines could play a major role in combating CHIKV [49] . Vaccines are literally a critical component of CHIKV disease control and therefore research in this area is highly encouraged. The dramatic spread of dengue viruses (DENV) throughout tropical America since 1980 via the same vectors and human hosts underscores the risk to public health in the Americas. The adverse events associated with the current live vaccine are well documented [55] . Realizing these drawbacks, earnest efforts should be taken to develop new strategies to forestall further spread and complications. | What is CHIKV? | 2,475 | an arthropod-borne virus (arbovirus | 1,491 |
1,689 | Chikungunya: A Potentially Emerging Epidemic?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2860491/
SHA: f7c3160bef4169d29e2a8bdd79dd6e9056d4774c
Authors: Thiboutot, Michelle M.; Kannan, Senthil; Kawalekar, Omkar U.; Shedlock, Devon J.; Khan, Amir S.; Sarangan, Gopalsamy; Srikanth, Padma; Weiner, David B.; Muthumani, Karuppiah
Date: 2010-04-27
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623
License: cc-by
Abstract: Chikungunya virus is a mosquito-borne emerging pathogen that has a major health impact in humans and causes fever disease, headache, rash, nausea, vomiting, myalgia, and arthralgia. Indigenous to tropical Africa, recent large outbreaks have been reported in parts of South East Asia and several of its neighboring islands in 2005–07 and in Europe in 2007. Furthermore, positive cases have been confirmed in the United States in travelers returning from known outbreak areas. Currently, there is no vaccine or antiviral treatment. With the threat of an emerging global pandemic, the peculiar problems associated with the more immediate and seasonal epidemics warrant the development of an effective vaccine. In this review, we summarize the evidence supporting these concepts.
Text: Chikungunya virus (CHIKV), a mosquito-borne pathogen listed by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) as a Category C Priority Pathogen that causes Chikungunya fever (CHIKF), has been spreading throughout Asia, Africa, and parts of Europe in recent times [1, 2, 3] . CHIKV is an arthropod-borne virus (arbovirus) and is transmitted to humans primarily by Aedes aegypti, the infamous yellow fever propagator [4, 5] . CHIKV infection is marked by severe joint pain, contorting its victims into unusual postures [6] . The disease gets its name from the Kimakonde vernacular language of Tanzania and Mozambique, and the word chikungunya means ''that which contorts or bends up'' and translates in Swahili to ''the illness of the bended walker'' [7, 8, 9] . In Africa, CHIKV is maintained in a sylvatic cycle among forest-dwelling Aedes spp. mosquitoes, wild primates, squirrels, birds, and rodents ( Figure 1 ) [10] . In Asia, the disease is vectored by Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus [11] . Transmission in Asia occurs in an urban cycle whereby the mosquito spreads the disease from an infected human to an uninfected human, following an epidemiological pattern similar to dengue fever [12] .
The 2005-2006 epidemic of CHIKV in La Reunion islands in the Indian Ocean, spurred the discovery of a new vector species, Ae. albopictus [5] . Wrecking over one-third of the island's population, this epidemic peaked its devastation between January and February 2006, when over 46,000 cases came into light every week, including 284 deaths [5, 13] . Ae. albopictus is common in urban areas of the United States and is already flourishing in 36 states, raising grave concerns to the immunologically naive populace of the United States [14] .
Accordingly, this review elaborately details the epidemiology and global expansion of CHIKV, describes its clinical features and pathogenesis and its symptoms and complications, and finally nominates a possible vaccine approach against CHIKV infection.
CHIKV has been isolated into three genotypes based on phylogenetic studies. These genotypes, based on the gene sequences of an Envelope protein (E1), are Asian, East/Central/ South African, and West African [4, 11, 15] . Using phylogenetic models, Cherian et al. estimate that the Asian genotype of CHIKV emerged between 50 and 310 y ago, and the West and East African genotypes diverged between 100 and 840 y ago [15] . Since then, CHIKV has come a long way, with several mutations incorporated, and has continued to wreak epidemics in several regions. Recent activities of CHIKV include the Indian epidemic in 2005-2006, which was followed by a sudden explosion of cases in 2007. An estimated 1.3 million people across 13 states were reported to be infected in India [12, 16] , and CHIKV was also widespread in Malaysia, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia [17] . In July-August of 2007, CHIKV was reported in Italy, probably brought in by travelers from CHIKV-prone regions of India, Africa, and Indian Ocean islands such as Mauritius, Madagascar, and Seychelles. Few of the Italian isolates were found to have evolved from the Kerala isolate, which was associated with a A226V shift in E1 gene that represents a successful evolutionary adaptation in the mosquito vector similar to the ones observed in Reunion Island [2, 18, 19] .
In recent times, with an increase in global travel, the risk for spreading CHIKV to non-endemic regions has heightened [1] . Several travelers have brought CHIKV home with them after visiting areas with actively infected populations [12, 20] . Such cases have been documented in European countries, Australia, Asia, and the United States [8, 21] . The United States has already reported at least twelve cases of travel-associated CHIKV, while France has reported 850 cases, and the United Kingdom 93 [8, 14] . Beyond this, CHIKV-infected travelers have also been diagnosed in Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, French Guiana, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Martinique, Norway, Switzerland, and Sri Lanka [21] . Some travelers were viremic, worrying public health officials about the spread of CHIKV to new areas [1, 8] .
The incubation time for CHIKV is relatively short, requiring only 2-6 d with symptoms usually appearing 4-7 d post-infection [22] . Vazeille et al. detected CHIKV in the salivary glands of Ae. albopictus only 2 d after infection [5] . Upon infection, CHIKF tends to present itself in two phases. The first stage is acute, while the second stage, experienced by most but not all, is persistent, causing disabling polyarthritis. Characteristics of the acute phase include an abrupt onset of fever, arthralgia, and in some cases, maculopapular rash [6, 23] . The acute phase causes such intense joint and muscular pain that makes movement very difficult and prostrates its victims [6, 20] .
Ninety-five percent of infected adults are symptomatic after infection, and of these, most become disabled for weeks to months as a result of decreased dexterity, loss of mobility, and delayed reaction. Eighteen months after disease onset, 40% of patients are found to still have anti-CHIKV IgM [6, 18, 23, 24] . The chronic stage of CHIKF is characterized by polyarthralgia that can last from weeks to years beyond the acute stage [6] . CHIKV has been shown to attack fibroblasts, explaining the involvement of muscles, joints, and skin connective tissues. The high number of nociceptive nerve endings found within the joints and muscle connective tissues can explain pain associated with CHIKF [25, 26] .
More than 50% of patients who suffer from severe CHIKF are over 65 y old, and more than 33% of them die. Most adults who suffer from severe CHIKF have underlying medical conditions [6, 24, 27] . The other group that is disproportionately affected by severe CHIKV is children. Other complications associated with CHIKV, from most common to least common, include respiratory failure, cardiovascular decompensation, meningoencephalitis, severe acute hepatitis, severe cutaneous effects, other central nervous system problems, and kidney failure [6, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 27] .
CHIKV undertakes a complex replication cycle upon host infection (Figure 2 ), which makes its genome susceptible to mutations [28, 29] . For instance, Ae. aegypti, responsible for epidemics in Kenya, Comoros, and Seychelles, carried CHIKV with an alanine in the 226 position of the E1 gene (E1-A226) [4, 18] . However, when the virus struck La Reunion Islands, a decline in population of Ae. aegypti, due to massive dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane usage and dearth of Ae. albopictus species' www.plosntds.org population, resulted in an ecological pressure, favoring replacement of alanine at position 226 with valine (E1-A226V) [5] . This mutation allowed CHIKV's secondary vector species, Ae. albopictus, to supplement Ae. aegypti as its primary vector [5] .
Within a year, the E1-A226V mutation was present in La Reunion Island, and Ae. albopictus apparently vectored the large epidemic infecting 34% of La Reunion Island's population [5] . All of the CHIKV strains isolated from Mayotte carried the E1-A226V mutation, and the mutation was also found in Madagascar in 2007 [5] . The E1-A226V mutation was not present at the beginning of the Indian Ocean Islands outbreak (before September 2005). However, more than 90% of later viral strains found there had incorporated the mutation (December-March 2006), indicating a genotype switch during the winter season [5, 18, 20] .
The E1-A226V mutation also enabled an increase in infectivity of Ae. albopictus when compared to its infectivity of Ae. aegypti [4, 11, 18, 30] , and with several factors taken together, Ae. albopictus has become the new preferred and more lethal vector for CHIKV [4, 5, 11] . In fact, Tsetsarkin et al. found that a Green Fluorescent Protein tagged E1-A226V virus was 100 times more infective to Ae. albopictus than it was to Ae. aegypti [4] . In all the Indian Ocean Islands, Ae. albopictus became the main vector for CHIKV within 1-2 y after CHIKV was introduced to the region [31] .
Of note is that Ae. aegypti has most likely been established in North America for over 300 y, while Ae. albopictus has been in many areas of the US, since 1985, primarily in Florida [32] and since then has expanded its range in the country. Reiskind et al. set out to determine if Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus mosquitoes captured in Florida were susceptible to CHIKV infection by a La Reunion isolate [32] . Each mosquito tested was highly susceptible to infection by a full-length infectious clone of the La Réunion Island isolate, CHIKV LR2006 OPY1 strain. Even though the Ae. albopictus strains were more susceptible to infection, overall ecology and differences in human biting patterns need to be studied further Characteristically, there are two rounds of translation: (+) sense genomic RNA (49S9 = 11.7 kb) acts directly as mRNA and is partially translated (59 end) to produce non-structural proteins (nsp's). These proteins are responsible for replication and formation of a complementary (2) strand, the template for further (+) strand synthesis. Subgenomic mRNA (26 S = 4.1 kb) replication occurs through the synthesis of full-length (2) intermediate RNA, which is regulated by nsp4 and p123 precursor in early infection and later by mature nsp's. Translation of the newly synthesized sub-genomic RNA results in production of structural proteins such as Capsid and protein E2-6k-E1 (from 39 end of genome). Assembly occurs at the cell surface, and the envelope is acquired as the virus buds from the cell and release and maturation almost simultaneous occurred. Replication occurs in the cytoplasm and is very rapid (,4 h) [28, 29] . doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g002 www.plosntds.org to gain a more accurate understanding of a potential CHIKV epidemic in the US [32] .
During the 7 d preceding birth, no human mother has been reported to transmit the disease vertically. However, about 50% of newborns delivered while the mother was infected with CHIKV contracted the disease from their mother, despite the method of delivery. Furthermore, there have been instances of CHIKV transmission from mother to fetus causing congenital illness and fetal death [33] .
During the 2005-2006 La Reunion Island outbreaks, Ramful et al. discovered that mothers could transmit CHIKV to their progeny during the perinatal period (Day 24 to Day +1) [33, 34] , and it is associated with a high degree of morbidity. By mean Day 4 of life, all of the neonates were symptomatic for CHIKV, exhibiting common CHIKF symptoms. Six neonates were confirmed to have contracted CHIKV and developed mengoencephalitis. Of those mothers who, during the La Reunion Island epidemic, were infected long before delivery, only three fetal deaths were reported [12, 33] . Ramful et al. theorized that motherto-child transmission most likely happens transplacentally shortly before delivery [33] . A similar study by Gerardin et al. reported nineteen cases of neonatal infection associated with intrapartum maternal viremia that progressed to develop encephalitis owing to vertical transmission from infected mothers [34] .
Clinical and epidemiological similarities with dengue fever make CHIKV diagnosis difficult, which may lead physicians to misdiagnose CHIKV as dengue fever; therefore, the incidence of CHIKV may actually be higher than currently believed (Table 1 ) [6, 12, 35] .
The amount of time elapsed since disease onset is the most critical parameter when choosing a diagnostic test. CHIKV can be detected and isolated by culturing with mosquito cells (C6/36), Vero cells (mammalian), or in mice [26] . However, this method can take at least a week and only achieves a high sensitivity during the viremic phase, which usually only lasts up to 48 h after the bite. Five days post-infection, the viral isolation approach has a low sensitivity but is still the preferred method for detecting the CHIKV strain [12, 26, 31, 35] . RT-PCR on the other hand is a faster and more sensitive method that can be used within the first week of disease onset [26] , and it is currently the most sensitive method for detecting and quantifying viral mRNA [4, 36] .
Classic serological detection, by assays such as ELISA [37] , immunofluorescence [5, 38] , complement binding, and haemagglutination inhibition [39] , constitutes the second diagnostic tool used for biological diagnosis of CHIKV infection. These proven techniques are useful for detection of Antigen in mosquitoes during epidemiological studies. These assays detect virus-specific IgM and IgG, however the sensitivity and specificity of these assays has been poorly characterized. Viral competence, or the potential of viral infection and transmission, is an important parameter that can be quantified by ELISA, viral culture, and PCR.
A study by Ng et al. showed biomarkers indicative of severe CHIKV infection [40] . They found decreased levels of RANTES and increased levels of Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and Interleukin-1b (IL-1b) that could be sued for CHIKV detection in patients as indicators of CHIKV-driven cytokine storm. Couderc et al. demonstrate another cytokine, type-I IFN, as a key player in the progression to CHIKV infection [26] . Using an IFN-a/b null mouse model, they demonstrated evidence of muscles, joints, and skin as privileged CHIKV targets, which is consistent with human pathology. Although Ng et al. concluded that RANTES levels were significantly suppressed in severe CHIKF patients [40] , interestingly, an increase in levels of RANTES has been observed in dengue infection [41] . Since the symptoms of CHIKF mimic those of dengue fever, results obtained from this study strongly suggest that RANTES could be a potential distinctive biomarker that differentiates between these two clinically similar diseases.
There are no approved antiviral treatments currently available for CHIKV [1, 3, 12, 42] . Currently, CHIKF is treated symptomatically, usually with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or steroids, bed rest, and fluids. Movement and mild exercise are thought to decrease stiffness and morning arthralgia, but heavy exercise may exacerbate rheumatic symptoms. Corticosteroids may be used in cases of debilitating chronic CHIKV infection. There is a debate about the appropriateness of chloroquine as treatment for unresolved, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugresistant arthritis [43] . A study showed that viral production was www.plosntds.org drastically reduced at 16 h post-infection after treatment with 100 mM dec-RVKR-cmk (Decanoyl-Arg-Val-Lys-Arg-chloromethylketone), a furine inhibitor [42, 44] . Chloroquine acted by raising the pH, blocking low pH-dependent entry of virus into the cell. It is important to note that dec-RVKR-cmk or chloroquine only inhibited viral spreading from cell to cell, not CHIKV replication once it had entered the cell [43] . However, most would agree that the best weapon against CHIKV is prevention. A live CHIKV vaccine developed by the United States reached phase II clinical trial encompassing 59 healthy volunteers [45] . Eight percent of the volunteers experienced transient arthralgia, while 98% of the volunteers had seroconversion [45] . However, live CHIKV vaccines are still questionable. One cannot discount the risk of a live vaccine possibly inducing chronic rheumatism. Also, there is the question as to whether widespread use among the public could trigger mosquito transmission or lead to chronic infection or viral reversion [1] .
An alternative approach would be to produce a chimeric vaccine against CHIKV. Wang et al. developed a chimeric alphavirus vaccine that is uniformly attenuated and does not cause reactogenicity in mice [3] . Three different versions of this vaccine were made using three different backbone vectors: Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (VEEV) attenuated vaccine strain T-83, naturally attenuated eastern equine encephalitis virus (EEEV), and attenuated Sindbis virus (SINV). In short, CHIKV structural proteins were engineered into the backbones of the aforementioned vaccines to produce the chimeras [3] . These chimeras were found to stimulate a strong humoral immunity, and even at doses of 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU, they did not trigger reactogenicity. When vaccinated mice were challenged with CHIKV, neither adult nor neonatal mice gained weight, had fever, or displayed signs of neurological illness. Upon comparison of the chimeras with the Army181/25 vaccine, the Army vaccine resulted in higher levels of viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice. Because the joints are known targets of CHIKV, Wang et al. noted their vaccine might avoid the negative reactogenic side effects of the Army vaccine. After being subcutaneously vaccinated with 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU of the chimeric vaccines, mice produced strong neutralizing antibody titers. The VEEV and EEEV chimeras yielded higher neutralizing antibody titers than the SINV chimera without being more virulent. On top of this, the VEEV and EEEV CHIKV chimeras seemed to be more immunogenic than the Army vaccine despite the chimeras' lower viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice [3] .
Tiwari et al. [46] adopted a different strategy using formalin inactivated CHIKV in combination with alhydrogel (Aluminum Hydroxide) as an adjuvant. This study clearly suggests that this vaccine elicits both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses in mice, providing its immunogenic potential. A recent study by Couderc et al. [47] showed passive immunization as a potential treatment for CHIKV infection. Using purified immunoglobulin extracted from convalescent CHIKV patients, they demonstrated effective neutralizing activity against CHIKV infection both in vitro and in vivo. This thereby establishes a potential preventive and therapeutic approach to combat CHIKV infection. Pathogenesis studies conducted with related alpha virus, like RRV, have shown the role of macrophages in persistence on infection [48] . They also demonstrated the role of RRV-specific CD8 T cells in clearing viral load in infected patients, thereby warranting similar investigations with CHIKV and the importance of investigating a cell-mediated immune response-based vaccine against CHIKV [49] .
There are always certain risks associated with live attenuated or inactivated viral vaccines [50] . One way to avoid these potential problems is to construct a consensus-based DNA vaccine. DNA based vaccines have an improved safety profile as compared to live or attenuated vaccines [51, 52] . A consequence of CHIKV's rapid evolution is difficulty in constructing a vaccine that will be able to Figure 3 . Levels of CHIKV-specific IgG in mice immunized with CHIKV vaccines. Each group of C57BL/6 mice (n = 5) was immunized with 12.5 mg of pVax1 control vector or CHIKV vaccine plasmids as indicated at 0 and 2 wk. Mice were bled 2 wk after each immunization, and each group's serum pool was diluted to 1:100 and 1:500 for reaction with specific vaccine constructs. Serum was incubated for 1 h at 37uC on 96-well plates coated with 2 mg/ml of respective CHIKV peptides, and antibody was detected using anti-mouse IgG-HRP and OD was measured at 405 nm. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g003 www.plosntds.org effectively protect large populations from multiple strains of the virus. One of the strengths of DNA consensus vaccines is its ability to induce cross-reactive immune responses against the three distinct phylogenetic groups of CHIKV. Also DNA-based vaccines can be produced more rapidly than protein-based vaccines.
Recently, Muthumani et al. constructed a vaccine that was shown to induce both humoral and cellular immunity in vivo in 3-4-wk-old female C57/BL6 mice [49] . These mice were immunized using an in vivo electroporation method to deliver the vaccine into the quadriceps muscle. The consensus construct was designed against E1, E2, and the core protein capsid. To design the construct, they aligned 21 sequences of CHIKV isolated between 1952 and 2006, using strains from differing countries, including La Reunion Island. The most common nucleotide among the sequences was chosen at each position to be used in the consensus construct, taking care not to alter the reading frame. They conducted codon and RNA optimization, added a strong Kozak sequence, and substituted signal peptide with an immunoglobulin E leader sequence to improve vaccine efficacy.
After immunizing the mice, spleens were harvested along with serum and tested to determine antibody titer. After three immunizations, consensus E1, E2, and C vaccines were shown to induce T-cell immune responses leading to strong IFN-c responses and proliferation in C57/BL6 mice. Furthermore, when compared with control mice, immunized mice had higher total IgG levels as well as higher anti-E1 specific, anti-E2 specific, and anti-C specific IgG antibodies, suggesting a strong humoral immune response ( Figure 3 ) and also specificity for the antigens encoded in the vaccine constructs ( Figure 4 ). Because of its promising results and the need for a safer vaccine, this consensus DNA vaccine deserves further investigation. Determining longevity of protective effects of the vaccine and persistence of antibody and IFN-c responses could be the next step of investigation. Challenged studies of immunized mice must also be carried out.
CHIKV mosquito-borne disease has caused massive outbreaks for at least half a century but is no longer confined to the www.plosntds.org developing nations. It began to encroach into the boundaries of the developing world. As a result, the NIAID has designated CHIKV as a Category C pathogen alongside the influenza and SARS-CoV viruses [3] . Realization of the potential severity of this disease is exigent; for instance, if used as a biological weapon, the world economy could be severely crippled; if enough members of the armed forces were to become infected during a military deployment, military operations could be significantly affected. Efforts to monitor the disease will only provide minimal warning in a global society, and steps to prevent the morbidity and mortality associated with pandemic are imperative [21, 31] . Despite the gravity of its infectious potency and the fear of it being a potential biological weapon, there is currently no vaccine for CHIKV infections. Live attenuated vaccine trials were carried out in 2000, but funding for the project was discontinued. Newer approaches such as DNA vaccines appear promising over conventional strategies like live attenuated or inactivated virus and thus call for further investigation. Recent advances such electroporation delivery and incorporation of adjuvants has boosted DNA vaccine efficacy [51, 53] . Despite the low antibody response to DNA vaccines, other numerous advantages have overshadowed these minor drawbacks (Table 2) , the most important one being the ability to induce both humoral and cellular immune responses [51, 54] .
Judging by recent success, such as the immunogenic construct developed by Muthumani et al., DNA vaccines could play a major role in combating CHIKV [49] . Vaccines are literally a critical component of CHIKV disease control and therefore research in this area is highly encouraged. The dramatic spread of dengue viruses (DENV) throughout tropical America since 1980 via the same vectors and human hosts underscores the risk to public health in the Americas. The adverse events associated with the current live vaccine are well documented [55] . Realizing these drawbacks, earnest efforts should be taken to develop new strategies to forestall further spread and complications. | How is CHIKV propagated to humans? | 2,476 | primarily by Aedes aegypti, the infamous yellow fever propagator | 1,557 |
1,689 | Chikungunya: A Potentially Emerging Epidemic?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2860491/
SHA: f7c3160bef4169d29e2a8bdd79dd6e9056d4774c
Authors: Thiboutot, Michelle M.; Kannan, Senthil; Kawalekar, Omkar U.; Shedlock, Devon J.; Khan, Amir S.; Sarangan, Gopalsamy; Srikanth, Padma; Weiner, David B.; Muthumani, Karuppiah
Date: 2010-04-27
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623
License: cc-by
Abstract: Chikungunya virus is a mosquito-borne emerging pathogen that has a major health impact in humans and causes fever disease, headache, rash, nausea, vomiting, myalgia, and arthralgia. Indigenous to tropical Africa, recent large outbreaks have been reported in parts of South East Asia and several of its neighboring islands in 2005–07 and in Europe in 2007. Furthermore, positive cases have been confirmed in the United States in travelers returning from known outbreak areas. Currently, there is no vaccine or antiviral treatment. With the threat of an emerging global pandemic, the peculiar problems associated with the more immediate and seasonal epidemics warrant the development of an effective vaccine. In this review, we summarize the evidence supporting these concepts.
Text: Chikungunya virus (CHIKV), a mosquito-borne pathogen listed by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) as a Category C Priority Pathogen that causes Chikungunya fever (CHIKF), has been spreading throughout Asia, Africa, and parts of Europe in recent times [1, 2, 3] . CHIKV is an arthropod-borne virus (arbovirus) and is transmitted to humans primarily by Aedes aegypti, the infamous yellow fever propagator [4, 5] . CHIKV infection is marked by severe joint pain, contorting its victims into unusual postures [6] . The disease gets its name from the Kimakonde vernacular language of Tanzania and Mozambique, and the word chikungunya means ''that which contorts or bends up'' and translates in Swahili to ''the illness of the bended walker'' [7, 8, 9] . In Africa, CHIKV is maintained in a sylvatic cycle among forest-dwelling Aedes spp. mosquitoes, wild primates, squirrels, birds, and rodents ( Figure 1 ) [10] . In Asia, the disease is vectored by Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus [11] . Transmission in Asia occurs in an urban cycle whereby the mosquito spreads the disease from an infected human to an uninfected human, following an epidemiological pattern similar to dengue fever [12] .
The 2005-2006 epidemic of CHIKV in La Reunion islands in the Indian Ocean, spurred the discovery of a new vector species, Ae. albopictus [5] . Wrecking over one-third of the island's population, this epidemic peaked its devastation between January and February 2006, when over 46,000 cases came into light every week, including 284 deaths [5, 13] . Ae. albopictus is common in urban areas of the United States and is already flourishing in 36 states, raising grave concerns to the immunologically naive populace of the United States [14] .
Accordingly, this review elaborately details the epidemiology and global expansion of CHIKV, describes its clinical features and pathogenesis and its symptoms and complications, and finally nominates a possible vaccine approach against CHIKV infection.
CHIKV has been isolated into three genotypes based on phylogenetic studies. These genotypes, based on the gene sequences of an Envelope protein (E1), are Asian, East/Central/ South African, and West African [4, 11, 15] . Using phylogenetic models, Cherian et al. estimate that the Asian genotype of CHIKV emerged between 50 and 310 y ago, and the West and East African genotypes diverged between 100 and 840 y ago [15] . Since then, CHIKV has come a long way, with several mutations incorporated, and has continued to wreak epidemics in several regions. Recent activities of CHIKV include the Indian epidemic in 2005-2006, which was followed by a sudden explosion of cases in 2007. An estimated 1.3 million people across 13 states were reported to be infected in India [12, 16] , and CHIKV was also widespread in Malaysia, Sri Lanka, and Indonesia [17] . In July-August of 2007, CHIKV was reported in Italy, probably brought in by travelers from CHIKV-prone regions of India, Africa, and Indian Ocean islands such as Mauritius, Madagascar, and Seychelles. Few of the Italian isolates were found to have evolved from the Kerala isolate, which was associated with a A226V shift in E1 gene that represents a successful evolutionary adaptation in the mosquito vector similar to the ones observed in Reunion Island [2, 18, 19] .
In recent times, with an increase in global travel, the risk for spreading CHIKV to non-endemic regions has heightened [1] . Several travelers have brought CHIKV home with them after visiting areas with actively infected populations [12, 20] . Such cases have been documented in European countries, Australia, Asia, and the United States [8, 21] . The United States has already reported at least twelve cases of travel-associated CHIKV, while France has reported 850 cases, and the United Kingdom 93 [8, 14] . Beyond this, CHIKV-infected travelers have also been diagnosed in Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, French Guiana, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Martinique, Norway, Switzerland, and Sri Lanka [21] . Some travelers were viremic, worrying public health officials about the spread of CHIKV to new areas [1, 8] .
The incubation time for CHIKV is relatively short, requiring only 2-6 d with symptoms usually appearing 4-7 d post-infection [22] . Vazeille et al. detected CHIKV in the salivary glands of Ae. albopictus only 2 d after infection [5] . Upon infection, CHIKF tends to present itself in two phases. The first stage is acute, while the second stage, experienced by most but not all, is persistent, causing disabling polyarthritis. Characteristics of the acute phase include an abrupt onset of fever, arthralgia, and in some cases, maculopapular rash [6, 23] . The acute phase causes such intense joint and muscular pain that makes movement very difficult and prostrates its victims [6, 20] .
Ninety-five percent of infected adults are symptomatic after infection, and of these, most become disabled for weeks to months as a result of decreased dexterity, loss of mobility, and delayed reaction. Eighteen months after disease onset, 40% of patients are found to still have anti-CHIKV IgM [6, 18, 23, 24] . The chronic stage of CHIKF is characterized by polyarthralgia that can last from weeks to years beyond the acute stage [6] . CHIKV has been shown to attack fibroblasts, explaining the involvement of muscles, joints, and skin connective tissues. The high number of nociceptive nerve endings found within the joints and muscle connective tissues can explain pain associated with CHIKF [25, 26] .
More than 50% of patients who suffer from severe CHIKF are over 65 y old, and more than 33% of them die. Most adults who suffer from severe CHIKF have underlying medical conditions [6, 24, 27] . The other group that is disproportionately affected by severe CHIKV is children. Other complications associated with CHIKV, from most common to least common, include respiratory failure, cardiovascular decompensation, meningoencephalitis, severe acute hepatitis, severe cutaneous effects, other central nervous system problems, and kidney failure [6, 18, 20, 23, 24, 26, 27] .
CHIKV undertakes a complex replication cycle upon host infection (Figure 2 ), which makes its genome susceptible to mutations [28, 29] . For instance, Ae. aegypti, responsible for epidemics in Kenya, Comoros, and Seychelles, carried CHIKV with an alanine in the 226 position of the E1 gene (E1-A226) [4, 18] . However, when the virus struck La Reunion Islands, a decline in population of Ae. aegypti, due to massive dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane usage and dearth of Ae. albopictus species' www.plosntds.org population, resulted in an ecological pressure, favoring replacement of alanine at position 226 with valine (E1-A226V) [5] . This mutation allowed CHIKV's secondary vector species, Ae. albopictus, to supplement Ae. aegypti as its primary vector [5] .
Within a year, the E1-A226V mutation was present in La Reunion Island, and Ae. albopictus apparently vectored the large epidemic infecting 34% of La Reunion Island's population [5] . All of the CHIKV strains isolated from Mayotte carried the E1-A226V mutation, and the mutation was also found in Madagascar in 2007 [5] . The E1-A226V mutation was not present at the beginning of the Indian Ocean Islands outbreak (before September 2005). However, more than 90% of later viral strains found there had incorporated the mutation (December-March 2006), indicating a genotype switch during the winter season [5, 18, 20] .
The E1-A226V mutation also enabled an increase in infectivity of Ae. albopictus when compared to its infectivity of Ae. aegypti [4, 11, 18, 30] , and with several factors taken together, Ae. albopictus has become the new preferred and more lethal vector for CHIKV [4, 5, 11] . In fact, Tsetsarkin et al. found that a Green Fluorescent Protein tagged E1-A226V virus was 100 times more infective to Ae. albopictus than it was to Ae. aegypti [4] . In all the Indian Ocean Islands, Ae. albopictus became the main vector for CHIKV within 1-2 y after CHIKV was introduced to the region [31] .
Of note is that Ae. aegypti has most likely been established in North America for over 300 y, while Ae. albopictus has been in many areas of the US, since 1985, primarily in Florida [32] and since then has expanded its range in the country. Reiskind et al. set out to determine if Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus mosquitoes captured in Florida were susceptible to CHIKV infection by a La Reunion isolate [32] . Each mosquito tested was highly susceptible to infection by a full-length infectious clone of the La Réunion Island isolate, CHIKV LR2006 OPY1 strain. Even though the Ae. albopictus strains were more susceptible to infection, overall ecology and differences in human biting patterns need to be studied further Characteristically, there are two rounds of translation: (+) sense genomic RNA (49S9 = 11.7 kb) acts directly as mRNA and is partially translated (59 end) to produce non-structural proteins (nsp's). These proteins are responsible for replication and formation of a complementary (2) strand, the template for further (+) strand synthesis. Subgenomic mRNA (26 S = 4.1 kb) replication occurs through the synthesis of full-length (2) intermediate RNA, which is regulated by nsp4 and p123 precursor in early infection and later by mature nsp's. Translation of the newly synthesized sub-genomic RNA results in production of structural proteins such as Capsid and protein E2-6k-E1 (from 39 end of genome). Assembly occurs at the cell surface, and the envelope is acquired as the virus buds from the cell and release and maturation almost simultaneous occurred. Replication occurs in the cytoplasm and is very rapid (,4 h) [28, 29] . doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g002 www.plosntds.org to gain a more accurate understanding of a potential CHIKV epidemic in the US [32] .
During the 7 d preceding birth, no human mother has been reported to transmit the disease vertically. However, about 50% of newborns delivered while the mother was infected with CHIKV contracted the disease from their mother, despite the method of delivery. Furthermore, there have been instances of CHIKV transmission from mother to fetus causing congenital illness and fetal death [33] .
During the 2005-2006 La Reunion Island outbreaks, Ramful et al. discovered that mothers could transmit CHIKV to their progeny during the perinatal period (Day 24 to Day +1) [33, 34] , and it is associated with a high degree of morbidity. By mean Day 4 of life, all of the neonates were symptomatic for CHIKV, exhibiting common CHIKF symptoms. Six neonates were confirmed to have contracted CHIKV and developed mengoencephalitis. Of those mothers who, during the La Reunion Island epidemic, were infected long before delivery, only three fetal deaths were reported [12, 33] . Ramful et al. theorized that motherto-child transmission most likely happens transplacentally shortly before delivery [33] . A similar study by Gerardin et al. reported nineteen cases of neonatal infection associated with intrapartum maternal viremia that progressed to develop encephalitis owing to vertical transmission from infected mothers [34] .
Clinical and epidemiological similarities with dengue fever make CHIKV diagnosis difficult, which may lead physicians to misdiagnose CHIKV as dengue fever; therefore, the incidence of CHIKV may actually be higher than currently believed (Table 1 ) [6, 12, 35] .
The amount of time elapsed since disease onset is the most critical parameter when choosing a diagnostic test. CHIKV can be detected and isolated by culturing with mosquito cells (C6/36), Vero cells (mammalian), or in mice [26] . However, this method can take at least a week and only achieves a high sensitivity during the viremic phase, which usually only lasts up to 48 h after the bite. Five days post-infection, the viral isolation approach has a low sensitivity but is still the preferred method for detecting the CHIKV strain [12, 26, 31, 35] . RT-PCR on the other hand is a faster and more sensitive method that can be used within the first week of disease onset [26] , and it is currently the most sensitive method for detecting and quantifying viral mRNA [4, 36] .
Classic serological detection, by assays such as ELISA [37] , immunofluorescence [5, 38] , complement binding, and haemagglutination inhibition [39] , constitutes the second diagnostic tool used for biological diagnosis of CHIKV infection. These proven techniques are useful for detection of Antigen in mosquitoes during epidemiological studies. These assays detect virus-specific IgM and IgG, however the sensitivity and specificity of these assays has been poorly characterized. Viral competence, or the potential of viral infection and transmission, is an important parameter that can be quantified by ELISA, viral culture, and PCR.
A study by Ng et al. showed biomarkers indicative of severe CHIKV infection [40] . They found decreased levels of RANTES and increased levels of Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and Interleukin-1b (IL-1b) that could be sued for CHIKV detection in patients as indicators of CHIKV-driven cytokine storm. Couderc et al. demonstrate another cytokine, type-I IFN, as a key player in the progression to CHIKV infection [26] . Using an IFN-a/b null mouse model, they demonstrated evidence of muscles, joints, and skin as privileged CHIKV targets, which is consistent with human pathology. Although Ng et al. concluded that RANTES levels were significantly suppressed in severe CHIKF patients [40] , interestingly, an increase in levels of RANTES has been observed in dengue infection [41] . Since the symptoms of CHIKF mimic those of dengue fever, results obtained from this study strongly suggest that RANTES could be a potential distinctive biomarker that differentiates between these two clinically similar diseases.
There are no approved antiviral treatments currently available for CHIKV [1, 3, 12, 42] . Currently, CHIKF is treated symptomatically, usually with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or steroids, bed rest, and fluids. Movement and mild exercise are thought to decrease stiffness and morning arthralgia, but heavy exercise may exacerbate rheumatic symptoms. Corticosteroids may be used in cases of debilitating chronic CHIKV infection. There is a debate about the appropriateness of chloroquine as treatment for unresolved, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugresistant arthritis [43] . A study showed that viral production was www.plosntds.org drastically reduced at 16 h post-infection after treatment with 100 mM dec-RVKR-cmk (Decanoyl-Arg-Val-Lys-Arg-chloromethylketone), a furine inhibitor [42, 44] . Chloroquine acted by raising the pH, blocking low pH-dependent entry of virus into the cell. It is important to note that dec-RVKR-cmk or chloroquine only inhibited viral spreading from cell to cell, not CHIKV replication once it had entered the cell [43] . However, most would agree that the best weapon against CHIKV is prevention. A live CHIKV vaccine developed by the United States reached phase II clinical trial encompassing 59 healthy volunteers [45] . Eight percent of the volunteers experienced transient arthralgia, while 98% of the volunteers had seroconversion [45] . However, live CHIKV vaccines are still questionable. One cannot discount the risk of a live vaccine possibly inducing chronic rheumatism. Also, there is the question as to whether widespread use among the public could trigger mosquito transmission or lead to chronic infection or viral reversion [1] .
An alternative approach would be to produce a chimeric vaccine against CHIKV. Wang et al. developed a chimeric alphavirus vaccine that is uniformly attenuated and does not cause reactogenicity in mice [3] . Three different versions of this vaccine were made using three different backbone vectors: Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (VEEV) attenuated vaccine strain T-83, naturally attenuated eastern equine encephalitis virus (EEEV), and attenuated Sindbis virus (SINV). In short, CHIKV structural proteins were engineered into the backbones of the aforementioned vaccines to produce the chimeras [3] . These chimeras were found to stimulate a strong humoral immunity, and even at doses of 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU, they did not trigger reactogenicity. When vaccinated mice were challenged with CHIKV, neither adult nor neonatal mice gained weight, had fever, or displayed signs of neurological illness. Upon comparison of the chimeras with the Army181/25 vaccine, the Army vaccine resulted in higher levels of viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice. Because the joints are known targets of CHIKV, Wang et al. noted their vaccine might avoid the negative reactogenic side effects of the Army vaccine. After being subcutaneously vaccinated with 5.3-5.8 log 10 PFU of the chimeric vaccines, mice produced strong neutralizing antibody titers. The VEEV and EEEV chimeras yielded higher neutralizing antibody titers than the SINV chimera without being more virulent. On top of this, the VEEV and EEEV CHIKV chimeras seemed to be more immunogenic than the Army vaccine despite the chimeras' lower viremia and replication in the joints of neonatal mice [3] .
Tiwari et al. [46] adopted a different strategy using formalin inactivated CHIKV in combination with alhydrogel (Aluminum Hydroxide) as an adjuvant. This study clearly suggests that this vaccine elicits both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses in mice, providing its immunogenic potential. A recent study by Couderc et al. [47] showed passive immunization as a potential treatment for CHIKV infection. Using purified immunoglobulin extracted from convalescent CHIKV patients, they demonstrated effective neutralizing activity against CHIKV infection both in vitro and in vivo. This thereby establishes a potential preventive and therapeutic approach to combat CHIKV infection. Pathogenesis studies conducted with related alpha virus, like RRV, have shown the role of macrophages in persistence on infection [48] . They also demonstrated the role of RRV-specific CD8 T cells in clearing viral load in infected patients, thereby warranting similar investigations with CHIKV and the importance of investigating a cell-mediated immune response-based vaccine against CHIKV [49] .
There are always certain risks associated with live attenuated or inactivated viral vaccines [50] . One way to avoid these potential problems is to construct a consensus-based DNA vaccine. DNA based vaccines have an improved safety profile as compared to live or attenuated vaccines [51, 52] . A consequence of CHIKV's rapid evolution is difficulty in constructing a vaccine that will be able to Figure 3 . Levels of CHIKV-specific IgG in mice immunized with CHIKV vaccines. Each group of C57BL/6 mice (n = 5) was immunized with 12.5 mg of pVax1 control vector or CHIKV vaccine plasmids as indicated at 0 and 2 wk. Mice were bled 2 wk after each immunization, and each group's serum pool was diluted to 1:100 and 1:500 for reaction with specific vaccine constructs. Serum was incubated for 1 h at 37uC on 96-well plates coated with 2 mg/ml of respective CHIKV peptides, and antibody was detected using anti-mouse IgG-HRP and OD was measured at 405 nm. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000623.g003 www.plosntds.org effectively protect large populations from multiple strains of the virus. One of the strengths of DNA consensus vaccines is its ability to induce cross-reactive immune responses against the three distinct phylogenetic groups of CHIKV. Also DNA-based vaccines can be produced more rapidly than protein-based vaccines.
Recently, Muthumani et al. constructed a vaccine that was shown to induce both humoral and cellular immunity in vivo in 3-4-wk-old female C57/BL6 mice [49] . These mice were immunized using an in vivo electroporation method to deliver the vaccine into the quadriceps muscle. The consensus construct was designed against E1, E2, and the core protein capsid. To design the construct, they aligned 21 sequences of CHIKV isolated between 1952 and 2006, using strains from differing countries, including La Reunion Island. The most common nucleotide among the sequences was chosen at each position to be used in the consensus construct, taking care not to alter the reading frame. They conducted codon and RNA optimization, added a strong Kozak sequence, and substituted signal peptide with an immunoglobulin E leader sequence to improve vaccine efficacy.
After immunizing the mice, spleens were harvested along with serum and tested to determine antibody titer. After three immunizations, consensus E1, E2, and C vaccines were shown to induce T-cell immune responses leading to strong IFN-c responses and proliferation in C57/BL6 mice. Furthermore, when compared with control mice, immunized mice had higher total IgG levels as well as higher anti-E1 specific, anti-E2 specific, and anti-C specific IgG antibodies, suggesting a strong humoral immune response ( Figure 3 ) and also specificity for the antigens encoded in the vaccine constructs ( Figure 4 ). Because of its promising results and the need for a safer vaccine, this consensus DNA vaccine deserves further investigation. Determining longevity of protective effects of the vaccine and persistence of antibody and IFN-c responses could be the next step of investigation. Challenged studies of immunized mice must also be carried out.
CHIKV mosquito-borne disease has caused massive outbreaks for at least half a century but is no longer confined to the www.plosntds.org developing nations. It began to encroach into the boundaries of the developing world. As a result, the NIAID has designated CHIKV as a Category C pathogen alongside the influenza and SARS-CoV viruses [3] . Realization of the potential severity of this disease is exigent; for instance, if used as a biological weapon, the world economy could be severely crippled; if enough members of the armed forces were to become infected during a military deployment, military operations could be significantly affected. Efforts to monitor the disease will only provide minimal warning in a global society, and steps to prevent the morbidity and mortality associated with pandemic are imperative [21, 31] . Despite the gravity of its infectious potency and the fear of it being a potential biological weapon, there is currently no vaccine for CHIKV infections. Live attenuated vaccine trials were carried out in 2000, but funding for the project was discontinued. Newer approaches such as DNA vaccines appear promising over conventional strategies like live attenuated or inactivated virus and thus call for further investigation. Recent advances such electroporation delivery and incorporation of adjuvants has boosted DNA vaccine efficacy [51, 53] . Despite the low antibody response to DNA vaccines, other numerous advantages have overshadowed these minor drawbacks (Table 2) , the most important one being the ability to induce both humoral and cellular immune responses [51, 54] .
Judging by recent success, such as the immunogenic construct developed by Muthumani et al., DNA vaccines could play a major role in combating CHIKV [49] . Vaccines are literally a critical component of CHIKV disease control and therefore research in this area is highly encouraged. The dramatic spread of dengue viruses (DENV) throughout tropical America since 1980 via the same vectors and human hosts underscores the risk to public health in the Americas. The adverse events associated with the current live vaccine are well documented [55] . Realizing these drawbacks, earnest efforts should be taken to develop new strategies to forestall further spread and complications. | From what language the disease gets its name? | 2,478 | Kimakonde vernacular language of Tanzania and Mozambique | 1,765 |
Subsets and Splits