Transcript

Viral Evasion Strategies

1

Lecture 14Virology W3310/4310

Spring 2012

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

“Don’t look back, something might be gaining on you!”

Satchel Paige

2

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Host vs. Virus

• What one does to the other?

• Evolution of strategies to evade innate and adaptive cell responses to infection - goal: survival, reproduction and release

3

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Strategies for Evasion

• Overwhelm the host

• Enter parenterally - Anyway other than the gut - Why?

• Disarm host defenses

4

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Acute Infections

SymptomsWhen to treat?

5

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Virus Offense Meets Host Defense

6

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Evasion

• Disarm innate immunity

• Regulate MHC molecules - responsible for antigen presentation

• Interfere with CTL and NK cells

• Alter antigen presentation

• Go and hide More on this later

7

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Host Defenses• Immune system, recognizes signal, amplifies

signal and controls invader

• Innate immunity, responds to everything

• Intranuclear modulatory molecules

• Interferons induce an antiviral state

• PKR

• Complement punches holes in membranes

• NK and CTLs

• Macrophages and neutrophils8

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Adaptive Immunity

• A memory response

• Activated in response to the innate immune system

• Results in clonal expansion of B and T cells - requires Th1 and Th2 cells

• Generation of Cytotoxic T celLs and antibody production

9

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Inflammatory Response

• Occurs in response to necrosis

• Results in release of cytokines and chemokines

• Recruits neutrophils and macrophages to site of damage

10

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Cytokines

• Primary output of innate immune response

• Rapid induction in response to infection

• Control inflammation

• Induce antiviral state, IFNs

• Regulate immune system

11

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Viral Response

• Virokines, it looks like, smells like, so don’t step in it - these mimetics bind and sequester host receptor molecules

• Viroceptors - soluble cytokine receptors - divert cytokines from initiating response

• Sabotage innate and adaptive defense without affecting growth in cell culture

12

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Products that Counter IFN

• Why? - Without IFN host has a reduced ability to contain viral infections

• dsRNA binding proteins - NS1 from Influenza - E3h from Poxviruses - US11 from HSV

• Ad VA-RNA - A dsRNA decoy that binds PKR

13

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Modulators of the IFN Response

14

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Regulators of ISGs

• ND10s are composed of host proteins that repress virus replication - innate nuclear defense - epigenetic regulation of virus replication - PML, an important ND10 constituent

• HSV ICP0 targets PML for proteolysis

15

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Dissolution of PML

16

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Translational Regulation

• Viruses modify host to favor synthesis of their own proteins

• IFNs establish an anti-viral state

• Induction of Protein Kinase R and other eIF2α kinases - inhibit translation - consequences for virus replication

17

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Innate Defense Targets

18

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

PKR

• Activated by binding dsRNA

• Autophosphorylates at S51

• Phosphorylates eIF2α - forms a very tight ternary complex with GDP- eIF2B - blocks recycling - translation is arrested

19

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

How Viruses Counteract Pkr

• Virus proteins have evolved to thwart host anti-virus defenses

• Herpes simplex virus US11 blocks Pkr activation

• Adenovirus VA RNAs bind tightly to Pkr - dsRNA decoy

• HPV E6 and HSV γ34.5 dephosphorylate eIF2α - γ34.5 interacts with PP1a redirecting it to eIF2α

20

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Phosphorylation of eIF2α

US11 a proteinAd VA RNAs

HPV E6HSV γ34.5

21

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Viral Modulators of Interferon

• Inhibit IFN synthesis

• IFN Receptor decoys

• Inhibition of IFN signaling

• Block function of Interferon Stimulated Genes

22

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Autophagy

23

For example, the most commonly used autophagy assays, biochemical detection of the lipidated form of LC3 (LC3-II) and detec-tion of the localization of LC3-II to punctate dots by light microscopy, are subject to many interpretations. Most investigators now rec-ognize that detection of increased LC3-II can indicate either more autophagosome forma-tion or a block in autophagosomal matura-tion, which necessitates the use of ancillary approaches to distinguish between these possibilities14. Perhaps less well appreciated is the idea that LC3 dots may represent the targeting of LC3 to structures other than autophagosomes, such as phagosomes, dou-ble-membraned scaffolds for the replication complexes of positive-strand RNA viruses, or even protein aggregates15–17. Similarly, LC3 may become lipidated, forming LC3-II, in the absence of autophagosome formation18,19. Thus, whereas LC3-II formation and localiza-tion of LC3 punctae are hallmark features of autophagosome formation (and sensitive parameters for the detection of autophagy), they lack complete specificity as markers of classical autophagy. The direct demonstra-tion of a function for autophagosomes in a process is the gold standard for proving that autophagy is involved. An extensive discus-sion of the various assays used in autophagy research, as well as the criteria for their use and interpretation, has been provided in a consen-sus paper published by many of the authorities in the field14.

The genetic knockout or knockdown of core autophagy genes is an effective way to turn off the autophagy pathway, but it is often unclear whether resulting phenotypes are due to a deficiency of classical autophagy or autophagy-independent functions of the autophagy genes. As reviewed elsewhere, autophagy genes are known to have alternative functions, including those in other membrane-trafficking events, axonal elongation and cell death20,21. Furthermore, investigators often assume that phenotypes noted in autophagy gene–deficient cells or organisms are due to lack of classical autophagy without providing direct experi-mental proof. Notably, for many studies of the involvement of autophagy genes in immunity (Fig. 3), it is not clear how classical autophagy, involv-ing the autophagolysosomal degradation of sequestered contents, could contribute to the described functions of autophagy genes. Thus, it is possible that autophagy genes act in other cellular processes that affect immune effector cell development and function. Here we will discuss advances related to the function of autophagy genes in the immune system.

Autophagy genes in antimicrobial defenseMore than a decade ago, the first published paper on Beclin 1, a mam-malian autophagy protein, demonstrated an antiviral function for exogenous neuronal expression of Beclin 1 in mice with alphavirus encephalitis22. Subsequently, endogenous autophagy genes were shown to be critical for the successful innate immune response to fungal, bacte-rial and viral pathogens in plants23, and viral evasion of Beclin 1 function by a herpes simplex virus neurovirulence factor was found to be essential

for lethal encephalitis in mice24. These studies collectively suggested a likely function for autophagy genes in pathogen defense in vivo. In parallel, many studies demonstrated a function for autophagy in vitro in defense against invading pathogens, including group A Streptococcus, Shigella flexneri, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Salmonella typhimurium and Toxoplasma gondii10,11,13.

Two recent studies have further confirmed an antimicrobial func-tion for autophagy genes in host defense in vivo against intracellular pathogens and have identified previously unknown relationships among innate immune signaling, autophagy genes and potential autophagy-independent functions of autophagy genes. An innate microbial sensor, the peptidoglycan-recognition protein PRGP-LE, which recognizes bac-terial diaminopimelic acid–type peptidoglycan, is crucial for autophagic control of Listeria monocytogenes infection in fly hemocytes and for host survival25. PRGP-LE-mediated resistance is associated with autophagy induction, requires the autophagy gene Atg5 and presumably involves the xenophagic degradation of bacteria (as bacteria are visualized in autophagosomes in wild-type animals). In this case, xenophagy tar-gets cytoplasmic bacteria that have escaped from the endosome for envelopment in an autophagosome and destruction. In other cases in which a pathogen inside a vesicular structure is targeted (such as mycobacteria inside phagosomes, or salmonella inside vacuoles), the membrane dynamics involved are incompletely defined. It may be that an autophagosome can envelop the entire vesicular structure containing

462 VOLUME 10 NUMBER 5 MAY 2009 NATURE IMMUNOLOGY

AUTOPHAGY

Vesiclenucleation

Isolationmembrane

Vesicleelongation

Vesicle breakdown& degradation

Autolysosome

Lysosome

Autophagosome

Docking &fusion

Atg5

Atg16L1

Atg16L1

Atg16L1

Atg16L1

Atg12

Atg16L1

LC3

Atg10 E2Atg5

Atg12

Atg5

Atg12

Atg5

Atg12

Atg5 Atg12

Atg5

Atg12

Atg4

LC3 -GlyAtg3 E2

LC3PE

LC3

Atg7 E1

Beclin 1

Class III PI(3)K complex

Vps34

Vps15Atg14

Bcl-2–Bcl-XL

Otherregulators

Ubiquitin-like conjugation systems

P

Autophagy suppression

Nutrient abundance

Insulin-Akt-TOR signaling

Immune signals:

IL-4

IL-13

FADD

Immunity-related GTPases

Autophagy induction

Starvation

Growth factor deprivation

Immune signals:

IFN-

TNF

TLRs

PKR-elF2 kinase

Jnk

FADD

Immunity-related GTPases

Figure 1 The autophagy pathway and its regulation. The autophagy pathway proceeds through a series of stages, including nucleation of the autophagic vesicle, elongation and closure of the autophagosome membrane to envelop cytoplasmic constituents, docking of the autophagosome with the lysosome, and degradation of the cytoplasmic material inside the autophagosome. Vesicle nucleation depends on a class III PI(3)K complex that contains various proteins (in light yellow box at right), as well as additional proteins that regulate the activity of this complex (such as rubicon, UVRAG, Ambra-1 and Bif-1). Vesicle elongation and completion involves the activity of two ubiquitin-like conjugation systems (light blue box at right). The autophagy pathway is positively regulated (green box at left) and negatively regulated (red box at left) by diverse environmental and immunological signals. TNF, tumor necrosis factor; PE, phosphatidylethanolamine; Gly, glycine; E1 and E2, ligases for ubiquitin-like conjugation systems.

REV IE W

a catabolic process involving degradation of a cell's own components through the lysosomal machinery

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

24

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

25

Stimulation and Inhibition of Autophagasome Formation

Mock HCMV UV-HCMV

4 h

8 h

24 h

LC3 an autophagy marker

pp65 HCMV protein

ds RNA Binding Domain

PKR Binding Domain

TRS1 (1-795)

Beclin Binding Domain

TRS1 an Inhibitor

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Apoptosis

• Host escape mechanism leading to cell death and inflammation by cysteine proteases (Caspases) - induction of cytokines - infected cells release proteins that are subsequently presented by MHCII - activation of CTLs

26

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Apoptosis

• Catabolic process involving degradation of a cell's own components through the lysosomal machinery

• Host controls induction and suppression

• Antiapoptotic:BCL-2 family members block mitochondrial translocation

• Proapoptotic:BAX and BAD cause induction of a caspase cascade by release of mitochondrial cytochrome C

27

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Intrinsic Death Receptor Pathway

Activators

28

Oligomerization

Inhibitors

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Extrinsic Death Receptor Pathway

Ligands

Receptors

Activation of Caspase 8

29

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Characteristics of Apoptosis

• Cell organelles are dismantled

• Vesicle formation and membrane blebbing

• DNA is cleaved

• Phosphatidylserine, annexin appear on cell surfaces

30

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Apoptosis

• Perturb the cell cycle and apoptosis is activated - cell falls apart and virus fails to complete replication cycle

• Block it and virus can complete replication

31

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Characteristics of Apoptosis

• Membrane blebbing and apoptotic body formation

32

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Characteristics of Apoptosis

• HSV ICP27 prevents DNA fragmentation

33

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Why Block Apoptosis?

• Why are cells induced after infection? - activation of quiescent cell machinery - checkpoint controls respond

• Virus responds to complete replication - failure leads to decreased yields

• Inhibit release of virus Antigens - eliminate T cell activation - evade immune response

34

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Apoptotic Pathways and Viruses

35

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

How to Block It

• HCMV transcribes a noncoding RNA (β2.7) that binds a mitochondrial protein that triggers apoptosis

• AD E1B binds BAX preventing caspase activation (intrinsic)

• AD E3 blocks Fas (Death Receptor) - induced apoptosis (extrinsic)

36

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

HIV Evades the Rig I Innate Immune Response

37

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

HIV Sequesters RIG-I to Lysosomes Where It Is Degraded

38

GFP-Protease+

Saquinavir

GFP-Protease RIG-I LAMP-1 Merge

GFP-Protease

GFP RIG-I Cytoplasmic

RIG-I Perinuclear

RIG-I Perinuclear

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Apobec

• A protein family whose function is to edit RNA - an ISG - deaminates C U

• Intrinsic antiviral

• Blocks replication of HIV, HBV and Measles

• Incorporated into HIV virus particles - Is the host a step ahead here?

39

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

How Apobec Inhibits HIV Replication

• C’s in - strand DNA are deaminated

• C U transitions result in GC AT pairs - TGG (W) codons become TAA (Stop)

• U containing DNA is attacked by U-DNA glycosidase - generates abasic site and becomes a target for endonucleases

40

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

How HIV Survives Apobec

• HIV encodes Vif which is incorporated in the virion

• Vif interacts in a species specific manner to bind Apobec and target it to the proteasome

41

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Humoral & Cell Immunity

MHC II MHC I

42

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Effects of Stimulating Cell Division• Clonal expansion - increases # of cell responders

• T cells kill cells bearing foreign peptide or protein - CD4+ Th recognize MHC II bound peptides - CD8+ Tc recognize MHC I bound peptides

• In response to cytokines from Th1 cells CD8+ become mature CTLs

• In response to cytokines from Th2 cells B cell synthesizes Ab (becomes a plasma cell)

• B cell can also become a memory cell43

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Adaptive Immunity

• Humoral

• Cell-mediated, recognition mediated by: - membrane bound Ab on B cells and or TCR - Ag presented by MHC I on all cells - Ag presented by MHC II on macrophages or dendritic cells

44

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

BCR and TCR

• Both bind antigen

• B cells as linear epitopes

• T cells as peptides

• Binding releases cytokines - stimulates cell division

45

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

T Cell Function• CD4+ Th cells differentiate into Th1 and Th2 cells

46

Differentiation

Cross RegulationTh1 Th2IL-4IL-5IL-10

IL-2IL-12IFN-γ

Cell-mediated immunitydominates proinflammatory

response

Antibody responsedominates

Th1 vs Th2 responseAg-presenting cell

+Immature CD4+ Th cell } Lymph node

Immune cross-regulation by cytokinesTh1 response Th2 response

Enhance

IL-2IL-12IFN-γ

Suppress

IL-4IL-10

Enhance

IL-4IL-5IL-6IL-10

Suppress

IL-12IFN-γ

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Two signal systems, MHC and accessory molecules and their ligands - lead to T cell activation

T Cell Surface Molecules and Ligands

47

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Immune Modulation

• Dendritic cells are often compromised by virus infection resulting in suppression of the immune response by: - interference with recruitment - impairment of Ag uptake or processing - interference with maturation - inability to migrate to lymphoid tissue - failure to activate T cells

48

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Remediation of T Cell Response

• EBV encodes an IL 10 homologue that suppresses the Th1 response - thus sparing infected B cells

• KSHV elaborates a horde of virokines (cytokine mimetics) that provide a refuge from immune surveillance

49

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

• No antigen receptors

• Secrete cytokines

• Kill cells lacking MHC I on the surface by recognizing missing self

• ADCC, NKs bind to IgG coated cells, release perforins and granzymes triggering apoptosis

Natural Killer Cells

IR>>AR

50

I

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Virus Modulation of NK Cells

• MHC I homologs

• Regulators of MHC I

• Release of virus-encoded cytokine-binding proteins (Viroceptors) block engagement of activating receptor

• Antagonist of activating receptor

• Infection of NK cell can lead to disruption of function or cell death

51

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Virus Modulation of NK Cells

52

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Virus Modulation of NK Cells

• HCV E2 protein binds CD81 on NK cells to block activation - don’t recognize infected cells

• HIV nef affects cell surface expression of some MHC I molecules but not HLA-E (cell is still protected)

• Poxviruses express proteins that bind IL-12 to inhibit IFN-γ production by NKs

53

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Exogenous Antigen Presentation

54

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

MHC I Presentation

55

MHC I

β2μ

cis

medial

trans

CD8

α chain

Tap1Tap 2

Calnexin

proteasome

T-cell receptor

β2μ

Lumen of ER

Ub-dependentproteolysis

Peptide in bindinggroove

Protein

Transportvesicles

Presenting cell

Golgi

Cytoplasm

T cell

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Fine Structure of MHC I Presentation

56

• Viral proteins interfere with MHC I mediated antigen presentation

• Just how many targets are there?Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Intercession by HSV-1 ICP47

57

• Prevents binding of peptides to TAPICP 47 retained in the ER

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Intercession by Ad E19

• Blocks MHC I -Tapasin interaction excludingit from the peptide loading complex

58

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Intercession by HCMV US6

• A 23k Da ER-restricted glycoprotein with luminal and cytoplasmic domains that inhibits ATP binding to TAP thus preventing peptide loading

59

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Intercession by EBV BNLF2a

• Prevents peptide and ATP binding to TAP like ICP47 and US6

60

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Intercession by HCMV US3

• A glycoprotein that interacts with Tapasin resulting in MHC 1 heavy chain degradation

61

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

• Targets peptide-loading complex-incorporated MHC 1 for degradation by ubiquitination, interacts with both TAP and Tapasin

Intercession by CMV mK3

62

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Cytomegaloviruses a Paradigm for Interference with MHC

• UL83 tegument protein inhibits proteasome processing by P*

• US6 inhibits MHC I translocation to the ER

• US3 inhibits MHC I transport across ER

• US2 & 11 force MHC I to cytoplasm

• UL18 is a MHC I mimetic thought to downregulate NK and CTLs

63

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

MHC Intercession Summary

• Viruses have to cope with their hosts

• For the host to succeed viral antigens must be presented on the cell surface

• Viruses have identified many points of intercession and defined how MHC I presents antigen

64

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

• Secreted Modulators

• Modulators on infected cell surface

• Stealth

• Antigenic hypervariability

• Bypass or kill lympocytes

• Block adaptive immune response

• Inhibit complement

• Modulate apoptosis

• Modulate autophagy

• Interfere with pattern recognition receptors

Immune Modulation Strategies

65

Tuesday, March 6, 2012


Top Related