AAV Exploits Subcellular Stress Associated with Inflammation, Endoplasmic Reticulum Expansion, and Misfolded Proteins in Models of Cystic Fibrosis

Barriers to infection act at multiple levels to prevent viruses, bacteria, and parasites from commandeering host cells for their own purposes. An intriguing hypothesis is that if a cell experiences stress, such as that elicited by inflammation, endoplasmic reticulum (ER) expansion, or misfolded proteins, then subcellular barriers will be less effective at preventing viral infection. Here we have used models of cystic fibrosis (CF) to test whether subcellular stress increases susceptibility to adeno-associated virus (AAV) infection. In human airway epithelium cultured at an air/liquid interface, physiological conditions of subcellular stress and ER expansion were mimicked using supernatant from mucopurulent material derived from CF lungs. Using this inflammatory stimulus to recapitulate stress found in diseased airways, we demonstrated that AAV infection was significantly enhanced. Since over 90% of CF cases are associated with a misfolded variant of Cystic Fibrosis Transmembrane Conductance Regulator (ΔF508-CFTR), we then explored whether the presence of misfolded proteins could independently increase susceptibility to AAV infection. In these models, AAV was an order of magnitude more efficient at transducing cells expressing ΔF508-CFTR than in cells expressing wild-type CFTR. Rescue of misfolded ΔF508-CFTR under low temperature conditions restored viral transduction efficiency to that demonstrated in controls, suggesting effects related to protein misfolding were responsible for increasing susceptibility to infection. By testing other CFTR mutants, G551D, D572N, and 1410X, we have shown this phenomenon is common to other misfolded proteins and not related to loss of CFTR activity. The presence of misfolded proteins did not affect cell surface attachment of virus or influence expression levels from promoter transgene cassettes in plasmid transfection studies, indicating exploitation occurs at the level of virion trafficking or processing. Thus, we surmised that factors enlisted to process misfolded proteins such as ΔF508-CFTR in the secretory pathway also act to restrict viral infection. In line with this hypothesis, we found that AAV trafficked to the microtubule organizing center and localized near Golgi/ER transport proteins. Moreover, AAV infection efficiency could be modulated with siRNA-mediated knockdown of proteins involved in processing ΔF508-CFTR or sorting retrograde cargo from the Golgi and ER (calnexin, KDEL-R, β-COP, and PSMB3). In summary, our data support a model where AAV exploits a compromised secretory system and, importantly, underscore the gravity with which a stressed subcellular environment, under internal or external insults, can impact infection efficiency

Influence of adeno-associated virus on adherence and growth properties of normal cells.

It has been shown previously that infection of newly established cell cultures from malignant human tumors with adeno-associated parvovirus type 2 or type 5 results in growth arrest and cell death. Here we report that the additionally observed antiproliferative effect on diploid human fibroblasts is transient and is connected to a reduced number of cells in S phase. Progression through the cell cycle is disturbed either in G0/G1 or at the G1/S boundary, but an additional arrest in G2 cannot be excluded. DNA synthesis and cell proliferation are resumed when cells are recultured after loosening of cell-matrix adhesions by trypsin treatment. In contrast, they are not resumed by solely providing growth factors via higher amounts of fetal calf serum. The results suggest that cell adherence is altered in adeno-associated parvovirus-infected human embryo fibroblasts

Adeno-Associated Virus Serotype 4 (AAV4) and AAV5 Both Require Sialic Acid Binding for Hemagglutination and Efficient Transduction but Differ in Sialic Acid Linkage Specificity

Adeno-associated virus serotype 4 (AAV4) and AAV5 have different tropisms compared to AAV2 and to each other. We recently reported that α2-3 sialic acid is required for AAV5 binding and transduction. In this study, we characterized AAV4 binding and transduction and found it also binds sialic acid, but the specificity is significantly different from AAV5. AAV4 can hemagglutinate red blood cells from several species, whereas AAV5 hemagglutinates only rhesus monkey red blood cells. Treatment of red blood cells with trypsin inhibited hemagglutination for both AAV4 and AAV5, suggesting that the agglutinin is a protein. Treatment of Cos and red blood cells with neuraminidases also indicated that AAV4 bound α2-3 sialic acid. However, resialylation experiments with neuraminidase-treated red blood cells demonstrated that AAV4 binding required α2–3 O-linked sialic acid, whereas AAV5 required N-linked sialic acid. Similarly, resialylation of sialic acid-deficient CHO cells supported this same conclusion. The difference in linkage specificity for AAV4 and AAV5 was confirmed by binding and transduction experiments with cells incubated with either N-linked or O-linked inhibitors of glycosylation. Furthermore, AAV4 transduction was only blocked with soluble α2-3 sialic acid, whereas AAV5 could be blocked with either α2–3 or α2-6 sialic acid. These results suggest that AAV4 and AAV5 require different sialic acid-containing glycoproteins for binding and transduction of target cells and they further explain the different tropism of AAV4 and AAV5