To Conquer the Host, Influenza Virus Is Packing It In: Interferon-Antagonistic Strategies beyond NS1

The Archer and the Prey: The Duality of PAF1C in Antiviral Immunity

In the ongoing arms race between virus and host, fine-tuned gene expression plays a critical role in antiviral signaling. However, viruses have evolved to disrupt this process and promote their own replication by targeting host restriction factors. Polymerase-associated factor 1 complex (PAF1C) is a key player in this relationship, recruiting other host factors to regulate transcription and modulate innate immune gene expression. Consequently, PAF1C is consistently targeted by a diverse range of viruses, either to suppress its antiviral functions or co-opt them for their own benefit. In this review, we delve into the current mechanisms through which PAF1C restricts viruses by activating interferon and inflammatory responses at the transcriptional level. We also highlight how the ubiquity of these mechanisms makes PAF1C especially vulnerable to viral hijacking and antagonism. Indeed, as often as PAF1C is revealed to be a restriction factor, viruses are found to have targeted the complex in reply.

The Contribution of Viral Proteins to the Synergy of Influenza and Bacterial Co-Infection

A severe course of acute respiratory disease caused by influenza A virus (IAV) infection is often linked with subsequent bacterial superinfection, which is difficult to cure. Thus, synergistic influenza-bacterial co-infection represents a serious medical problem. The pathogenic changes in the infected host are accelerated as a consequence of IAV infection, reflecting its impact on the host immune response. IAV infection triggers a complex process linked with the blocking of innate and adaptive immune mechanisms required for effective antiviral defense. Such disbalance of the immune system allows for easier initiation of bacterial superinfection. Therefore, many new studies have emerged that aim to explain why viral-bacterial co-infection can lead to severe respiratory disease with possible fatal outcomes. In this review, we discuss the key role of several IAV proteins-namely, PB1-F2, hemagglutinin (HA), neuraminidase (NA), and NS1-known to play a role in modulating the immune defense of the host, which consequently escalates the development of secondary bacterial infection, most often caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae. Understanding the mechanisms leading to pathological disorders caused by bacterial superinfection after the previous viral infection is important for the development of more effective means of prevention; for example, by vaccination or through therapy using antiviral drugs targeted at critical viral proteins.

Dynamic phospho-modification of viral proteins as a crucial regulatory layer of influenza A virus replication and innate immune responses

Influenza viruses are small RNA viruses with a genome of about 13 kb. Because of this limited coding capacity, viral proteins have evolved to fulfil multiple functions in the infected cell. This implies that there must be mechanisms allowing to dynamically direct protein action to a distinct activity in a spatio-temporal manner. Furthermore, viruses exploit many cellular processes, which also have to be dynamically regulated during the viral replication cycle. Phosphorylation and dephosphorylation of proteins are fundamental for the control of many cellular responses. There is accumulating evidence that this mechanism represents a so far underestimated level of regulation in influenza virus replication. Here, we focus on the current knowledge of dynamics of phospho-modifications in influenza virus replication and show recent examples of findings underlining the crucial role of phosphorylation in viral transport processes as well as activation and counteraction of the innate immune response.

The Two Sides of the Same Coin-Influenza Virus and Intracellular Signal Transduction

Cells respond to extracellular agents by activation of intracellular signaling pathways. Viruses can be regarded as such agents, leading to a firework of signaling inside the cell, primarily induced by pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) that provoke safeguard mechanisms to defend from the invader. In the constant arms race between pathogen and cellular defense, viruses not only have evolved mechanisms to suppress or misuse supposedly antiviral signaling processes for their own benefit but also actively induce signaling to promote replication. This creates viral dependencies that may be exploited for novel strategies of antiviral intervention. Here, we will summarize the current knowledge of activation and function of influenza virus-induced signaling pathways with a focus on nuclear factor (NF)-κB signaling, mitogen-activated protein kinase cascades, and the phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase pathway. We will discuss the opportunities and drawbacks of targeting these signaling pathways for antiviral intervention.

Anti-chicken type I IFN countermeasures by major avian RNA viruses

Chicken type I interferons (type I IFNs) are key antiviral players of the chicken innate immune system and are considered potent antiviral agents against avian viral pathogens. Chicken type I IFNs are divided into three subtypes namely, chIFN-α, chIFN-β, and chIFN-κ. Viral pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) recognized by their corresponding specific PRRs (pattern recognition receptors) induce the expression of chicken type I IFNs. Interaction of chicken type I IFNs with their subsequent IFN receptors results in the activation of the JAK-STAT pathway, which in turn activates hundreds of chicken interferon-stimulated genes (chISGs). These chISGs establish an antiviral state in neighboring cells and prevent the replication and dissemination of viruses within chicken cells. Chicken type I IFNs activate different pathways that constitute major antiviral innate defense mechanisms in chickens. However, evolutionary mechanisms in viruses have made them resistant to these antiviral players by manipulating host innate immune pathways. This review focuses on the underlying molecular mechanisms employed by avian RNA viruses to counteract chicken type I IFNs and chISGs through different viral proteins. This may help to understand host-pathogen interactions and the development of novel therapeutic strategies to control viral infections in poultry.

Innate Immune Evasion by Human Respiratory RNA Viruses

The impact of respiratory virus infections on the health of children and adults can be very significant. Yet, in contrast to most other childhood infections as well as other viral and bacterial diseases, prophylactic vaccines or effective antiviral treatments against viral respiratory infections are either still not available, or provide only limited protection. Given the widespread prevalence, a general lack of natural sterilizing immunity, and/or high morbidity and lethality rates of diseases caused by influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, coronaviruses, and rhinoviruses, this difficult situation is a genuine societal challenge. A thorough understanding of the virus-host interactions during these respiratory infections will most probably be pivotal to ultimately meet these challenges. This review attempts to provide a comparative overview of the knowledge about an important part of the interaction between respiratory viruses and their host: the arms race between host innate immunity and viral innate immune evasion. Many, if not all, viruses, including the respiratory viruses listed above, suppress innate immune responses to gain a window of opportunity for efficient virus replication and setting-up of the infection. The consequences for the host's immune response are that it is often incomplete, delayed or diminished, or displays overly strong induction (after the delay) that may cause tissue damage. The affected innate immune response also impacts subsequent adaptive responses, and therefore viral innate immune evasion often undermines fully protective immunity. In this review, innate immune responses relevant for respiratory viruses with an RNA genome will briefly be summarized, and viral innate immune evasion based on shielding viral RNA species away from cellular innate immune sensors will be discussed from different angles. Subsequently, viral enzymatic activities that suppress innate immune responses will be discussed, including activities causing host shut-off and manipulation of stress granule formation. Furthermore, viral protease-mediated immune evasion and viral manipulation of the ubiquitin system will be addressed. Finally, perspectives for use of the reviewed knowledge for the development of novel antiviral strategies will be sketched.

How Many Mammalian Reovirus Proteins are involved in the Control of the Interferon Response?

As with most viruses, mammalian reovirus can be recognized and attacked by the host-cell interferon response network. Similarly, many viruses have developed resistance mechanisms to counteract the host-cell response at different points of this response. Reflecting the complexity of the interferon signaling pathways as well as the resulting antiviral response, viruses can-and often have-evolved many determinants to interfere with this innate immune response and allow viral replication. In the last few years, it has been evidenced that mammalian reovirus encodes many different determinants that are involved in regulating the induction of the interferon response or in interfering with the action of interferon-stimulated gene products. In this brief review, we present our current understanding of the different reovirus proteins known to be involved, introduce their postulated modes of action, and raise current questions that may lead to further investigations.

A single mutation in the mammalian orthoreovirus S1 gene is responsible for increased interferon sensitivity in a virus mutant selected in Vero cells

In a previous study, a mammalian orthoreovirus mutant was isolated based on its increased ability to infect interferon-defective Vero cells and was referred to as Vero-cells-adapted virus (VeroAV). This virus exhibits reduced ability to resist the antiviral effect of interferon. In the present study, the complete genome sequence of VeroAV was first determined. Reverse genetics was then used to identify a unique mutation on the S1 gene, overlapping the σ1 and σ1 s reading frame, resulting in increased sensitivity to interferon. A virus lacking σ1 s expression consecutive to mutation of its initiation codon was then shown to exhibit a further increase in sensitivity to interferon, supporting the idea that σ1 s is the viral protein responsible. This identification of a new determinant of reovirus sensitivity to interferon gives credentials to the idea that multiple reovirus genes are responsible for the level of interferon induction and susceptibility to the interferon-induced antiviral activities.

Immune responses in influenza A virus and human coronavirus infections: an ongoing battle between the virus and host

Respiratory viruses, especially influenza A viruses and coronaviruses such as MERS-CoV, represent continuing global threats to human health. Despite significant advances, much needs to be learned. Recent studies in virology and immunology have improved our understanding of the role of the immune system in protection and in the pathogenesis of these infections and of co-evolution of viruses and their hosts. These findings, together with sophisticated molecular structure analyses, omics tools and computer-based models, have helped delineate the interaction between respiratory viruses and the host immune system, which will facilitate the development of novel treatment strategies and vaccines with enhanced efficacy.

Multiple proteins differing between laboratory stocks of mammalian orthoreoviruses affect both virus sensitivity to interferon and induction of interferon production during infection

In the course of previous works, it was observed that the virus laboratory stock (T3D^S) differs in sequence from the virus encoded by the ten plasmids currently in use in many laboratories (T3D^K), and derived from a different original virus stock. Seven proteins are affected by these sequence differences. In the present study, replication of T3D^K was shown to be more sensitive to the antiviral effect of interferon. Infection by the T3D^K virus was also shown to induce the production of higher amount of β and α-interferons compared to T3D^S. Two proteins, the μ2 and λ2 proteins, were found to be responsible for increased sensitivity to interferon while both μ2 and λ1 are responsible for increased interferon secretion. Altogether this supports the idea that multiple reovirus proteins are involved in the control of induction of interferon and virus sensitivity to the interferon-induced response. While interrelated, interferon induction and sensitivity can be separated by defined gene combinations. While both μ2 and λ2 were previously suspected of a role in the control of the interferon response, other proteins are also likely involved, as first shown here for λ1. This also further stresses that due caution should be exerted when comparing different virus isolates with different genetic background.

Understanding Influenza

Influenza, a serious illness of humans and domesticated animals, has been studied intensively for many years. It therefore provides an example of how much we can learn from detailed studies of an infectious disease and of how even the most intensive scientific research leaves further questions to answer. This introduction is written for researchers who have become interested in one of these unanswered questions, but who may not have previously worked on influenza. To investigate these questions, researchers must not only have a firm grasp of relevant methods and protocols; they must also be familiar with the basic details of our current understanding of influenza. This article therefore briefly covers the burden of disease that has driven influenza research, summarizes how our thinking about influenza has evolved over time, and sets out key features of influenza viruses by discussing how we classify them and what we understand of their replication. It does not aim to be comprehensive, as any researcher will read deeply into the specific areas that have grasped their interest. Instead, it aims to provide a general summary of how we came to think about influenza in the way we do now, in the hope that the reader's own research will help us to understand it better.

Chicken TBK1 interacts with STING and is involved in IFN-β signaling regulation

TANK-binding kinase 1 (TBK1) is an essential serine/threonine-protein kinase required for the Toll-like receptor (TLR)- and retinoic acid-inducible gene I (RIG-I) -mediated induction of type I IFN. Through endogenous Co-IP and LC-MS/MS, we identified chicken TBK1 (chTBK1) as a chSTING-interactive protein. Through exogenous Co-IP assay in transfected cells, we confirmed the interaction between chSTING and chTBK1. To better understand the biological role of chTBK1 in the chSTING-mediated IFN pathway, we cloned the chTBK1 and investigated its biological functions. Quantitative RT-PCR showed that chTBK1 mRNA was widely expressed in different tissues. The overexpression of chTBK1 in DF-1 cells induced the expression of IFN-β and ISGs and inhibited AIV viral replication. We identified indispensable domains of chTBK1 on IFN-β production via the generation of various chTBK1 mutant forms. Together, we identified the chTBK1 as a chSTING interactive protein and concluded that chTBK1 is involved in chSTING-triggered IFN-β signaling in chicken cells.

The C-Terminal Effector Domain of Non-Structural Protein 1 of Influenza A Virus Blocks IFN-β Production by Targeting TNF Receptor-Associated Factor 3

Influenza A virus non-structural protein 1 (NS1) antagonizes interferon response through diverse strategies, particularly by inhibiting the activation of interferon regulatory factor 3 (IRF3) and IFN-β transcription. However, the underlying mechanisms used by the NS1 C-terminal effector domain (ED) to inhibit the activation of IFN-β pathway are not well understood. In this study, we used influenza virus subtype of H5N1 to demonstrate that the NS1 C-terminal ED but not the N-terminal RNA-binding domain, binds TNF receptor-associated factor 3 (TRAF3). This results in an attenuation of the type I IFN signaling pathway. We found that the NS1 C-terminal ED (named NS1/126-225) inhibits the active caspase activation and recruitment domain-containing form of RIG-I [RIG-I(N)]-induced IFN-β reporter activity, the phosphorylation of IRF3, and the induction of IFN-β. Further analysis showed that NS1/126-225 binds to TRAF3 through the TRAF domain, subsequently decreasing TRAF3 K63-linked ubiquitination. NS1/126-225 binding also disrupted the formation of the mitochondrial antiviral signaling (MAVS)–TRAF3 complex, increasing the recruitment of IKKε to MAVS; ultimately shutting down the RIG-I(N)-mediated signal transduction and cellular antiviral responses. This attenuation of cellular antiviral responses leads to evasion of the innate immune response. Taken together, our findings offer an important insight into the interplay between the influenza virus and host innate immunity.

pH Optimum of Hemagglutinin-Mediated Membrane Fusion Determines Sensitivity of Influenza A Viruses to the Interferon-Induced Antiviral State and IFITMs

The replication and pathogenicity of influenza A viruses (IAVs) critically depend on their ability to tolerate the antiviral interferon (IFN) response. To determine a potential role for the IAV hemagglutinin (HA) in viral sensitivity to IFN, we studied the restriction of IAV infection in IFN-β-treated human epithelial cells by using 2:6 recombinant IAVs that shared six gene segments of A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 virus (PR8) and contained HAs and neuraminidases of representative avian, human, and zoonotic H5N1 and H7N9 viruses. In A549 and Calu-3 cells, viruses displaying a higher pH optimum of HA-mediated membrane fusion, H5N1-PR8 and H7N9-PR8, were less sensitive to the IFN-induced antiviral state than their counterparts with HAs from duck and human viruses, which fused at a lower pH. The association between a high pH optimum of fusion and reduced IFN sensitivity was confirmed by using HA point mutants of A/Hong Kong/1/1968-PR8 that differed solely by their fusion properties. Furthermore, similar effects of the viral fusion pH on IFN sensitivity were observed in experiments with (i) primary human type II alveolar epithelial cells and differentiated cultures of human airway epithelial cells, (ii) nonrecombinant zoonotic and pandemic IAVs, and (iii) preparations of IFN-α and IFN-λ1. A higher pH of membrane fusion and reduced sensitivity to IFN correlated with lower restriction of the viruses in MDCK cells stably expressing the IFN-inducible transmembrane proteins IFITM2 and IFITM3, which are known to inhibit viral fusion. Our results reveal that the pH optimum of HA-driven membrane fusion of IAVs is a determinant of their sensitivity to IFN and IFITM proteins.IMPORTANCE The IFN system constitutes an important innate defense against viral infection. Substantial information is available on how IAVs avoid detection by sensors of the IFN system and disable IFN signaling pathways. Much less is known about the ability of IAVs to tolerate the antiviral activity of IFN-induced cellular proteins. The IFN-induced proteins of the IFITM family block IAV entry into target cells and can restrict viral spread and pathogenicity. Here we show for the first time that the sensitivity of IAVs to the IFN-induced antiviral state and IFITM2 and IFITM3 proteins depends on the pH value at which the viral HA undergoes a conformational transition and mediates membrane fusion. Our data imply that the high pH optimum of membrane fusion typical of zoonotic IAVs of gallinaceous poultry, such as H5N1 and H7N9, may contribute to their enhanced virulence in humans.

Viral Evasion Strategies in Type I IFN Signaling - A Summary of Recent Developments

The immune system protects the organism against infections and the damage associated with them. The first line of defense against pathogens is the innate immune response. In the case of a viral infection, it induces the interferon (IFN) signaling cascade and eventually the expression of type I IFN, which then causes an antiviral state in the cells. However, many viruses have developed strategies to counteract this mechanism and prevent the production of IFN. In order to modulate or inhibit the IFN signaling cascade in their favor, viruses have found ways to interfere at every single step of the cascade, for example, by inducing protein degradation or cleavage, or by mediate protein polyubiquitination. In this article, we will review examples of viruses that modulate the IFN response and describe the mechanisms they use.