4.6 Article

A Human In Vitro Model to Study Adenoviral Receptors and Virus Cell Interactions

期刊

CELLS
卷 11, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cells11050841

关键词

adenovirus; receptor; CD46; CAR; knockout cell line; human; virus; tight-junction-knockout cell line; CD46-knockout cell line; CRISPR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the authors systematically analyzed the receptor usage of different adenoviruses using a reporter gene-tagged adenovirus library and a human gene knockout model. They found that some adenoviruses are dependent on the CD46 or CAR receptor, and other receptors or attachment structures may also play a role in adenovirus transduction.
To develop adenoviral cell- or tissue-specific gene delivery, understanding of the infection mechanisms of adenoviruses is crucial. Several adenoviral attachment proteins such as CD46, CAR and sialic acid have been identified and studied. However, most receptor studies were performed on non-human cells. Combining our reporter gene-tagged adenovirus library with an in vitro human gene knockout model, we performed a systematic analysis of receptor usage comparing different adenoviruses side-by-side. The CRISPR/Cas9 system was used to knockout CD46 and CAR in the human lung epithelial carcinoma cell line A549. Knockout cells were infected with 22 luciferase-expressing adenoviruses derived from adenovirus species B, C, D and E. HAdV-B16, -B21 and -B50 from species B1 as well as HAdV-B34 and -B35 were found to be CD46-dependent. HAdV-C5 and HAdV-E4 from species E were found to be CAR-dependent. Regarding cell entry of HAdV-B3 and -B14 and all species D viruses, both CAR and CD46 play a role, and here, other receptors or attachment structures may also be important since transductions were reduced but not completely inhibited. The established human knockout cell model enables the identification of the most applicable adenovirus types for gene therapy and to further understand adenovirus infection biology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据