Polyomavirus small T antigen controls viral chromatin modifications through effects on kinetics of virus growth and cell cycle progression

Live Cell Microscopy of Murine Polyomavirus Subnuclear Replication Centers

During polyomavirus (PyV) infection, host proteins localize to subnuclear domains, termed viral replication centers (VRCs), to mediate viral genome replication. Although the protein composition and spatial organization of VRCs have been described using high-resolution immunofluorescence microscopy, little is known about the temporal dynamics of VRC formation over the course of infection. We used live cell fluorescence microscopy to analyze VRC formation during murine PyV (MuPyV) infection of a mouse fibroblast cell line that constitutively expresses a GFP-tagged replication protein A complex subunit (GFP-RPA32). The RPA complex forms a heterotrimer (RPA70/32/14) that regulates cellular DNA replication and repair and is a known VRC component. We validated previous observations that GFP-RPA32 relocalized to sites of cellular DNA damage in uninfected cells and to VRCs in MuPyV-infected cells. We then used GFP-RPA32 as a marker of VRC formation and expansion during live cell microscopy of infected cells. VRC formation occurred at variable times post-infection, but the rate of VRC expansion was similar between cells. Additionally, we found that the early viral protein, small TAg (ST), was required for VRC expansion but not VRC formation, consistent with the role of ST in promoting efficient vDNA replication. These results demonstrate the dynamic nature of VRCs over the course of infection and establish an approach for analyzing viral replication in live cells.

Regulation of Polyomavirus Transcription by Viral and Cellular Factors

Polyomavirus infection is widespread in the human population. This family of viruses normally maintains latent infection within the host cell but can cause a range of human pathologies, especially in immunocompromised individuals. Among several known pathogenic human polyomaviruses, JC polyomavirus (JCPyV) has the potential to cause the demyelinating disease progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML); BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) can cause nephropathy in kidney transplant recipients, and Merkel cell polyomavirus (MCPyV) is associated with a highly aggressive form of skin cancer, Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC). While the mechanisms by which these viruses give rise to the relevant diseases are not well understood, it is clear that the control of gene expression in each polyomavirus plays an important role in determining the infectious tropism of the virus as well as their potential to promote disease progression. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms governing the transcriptional regulation of these pathogenic human polyomaviruses in addition to the best-studied simian vacuolating virus 40 (SV40). We highlight the roles of viral cis-acting DNA elements, encoded proteins and miRNAs that control the viral gene expression. We will also underline the cellular transcription factors and epigenetic modifications that regulate the gene expression of these viruses.

Murine polyomavirus DNA transitions through spatially distinct nuclear replication subdomains during infection

The replication of small DNA viruses requires both host DNA replication and repair factors that are often recruited to subnuclear domains termed viral replication centers (VRCs). Aside from serving as a spatial focus for viral replication, little is known about these dynamic areas in the nucleus. We investigated the organization and function of VRCs during murine polyomavirus (MuPyV) infection using 3D structured illumination microscopy (3D-SIM). We localized MuPyV replication center components, such as the viral large T-antigen (LT) and the cellular replication protein A (RPA), to spatially distinct subdomains within VRCs. We found that viral DNA (vDNA) trafficked sequentially through these subdomains post-synthesis, suggesting their distinct functional roles in vDNA processing. Additionally, we observed disruption of VRC organization and vDNA trafficking during mutant MuPyV infections or inhibition of DNA synthesis. These results reveal a dynamic organization of VRC components that coordinates virus replication.

Targeting histone epigenetics to control viral infections

During the past decades, many studies have significantly broadened our understanding of complex virus-host interactions to control chromatin structure and dynamics.1, 2 However, the role and impact of such modifications during viral infections is not fully revealed. Indeed, this type of regulation is bidirectional between the virus and the host. While viral replication and gene expression are significantly impacted by histone modifications on the viral chromatin,³ studies have shown that some viral pathogens dynamically manipulate cellular epigenetic factors to enhance their own survival and pathogenesis, as well as escape the immune system defense lines.⁴ In this dynamic, histone posttranslational modifications (PTMs) appear to play fundamental roles in the regulation of chromatin structure and recruitment of other factors.⁵ Genuinely, those PTMs play a vital role in lytic infection, latency reinforcement, or, conversely, viral reactivation.⁶ In this chapter, we will examine and review the involvement of histone modifications as well as their potential manipulation to control infections during various viral life cycle stages, highlighting their prospective implications in the clinical management of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), herpes simplex virus (HSV), human cytomegalovirus (HCMV), hepatitis B and C viruses (HBV and HCV, respectively), Epstein–Barr virus (EBV), and other viral diseases. Targeting histone modifications is critical in setting the treatment of chronic viral infections with both lytic and latent stages (HIV, HCMV, HSV, RSV), virus-induced cancers (HBV, HCV, EBV, KSHV, HPV), and epidemic/emerging viruses (e.g. influenza virus, arboviruses).

Activation of DNA damage repair pathways by murine polyomavirus

Nuclear replication of DNA viruses activates DNA damage repair (DDR) pathways, which are thought to detect and inhibit viral replication. However, many DNA viruses also depend on these pathways in order to optimally replicate their genomes. We investigated the relationship between murine polyomavirus (MuPyV) and components of DDR signaling pathways including CHK1, CHK2, H2AX, ATR, and DNAPK. We found that recruitment and retention of DDR proteins at viral replication centers was independent of H2AX, as well as the viral small and middle T-antigens. Additionally, infectious virus production required ATR kinase activity, but was independent of CHK1, CHK2, or DNAPK signaling. ATR inhibition did not reduce the total amount of viral DNA accumulated, but affected the amount of virus produced, indicating a defect in virus assembly. These results suggest that MuPyV may utilize a subset of DDR proteins or non-canonical DDR signaling pathways in order to efficiently replicate and assemble.

Viral epigenetics

DNA tumor viruses including members of the polyomavirus, adenovirus, papillomavirus, and herpes virus families are presently the subject of intense interest with respect to the role that epigenetics plays in control of the virus life cycle and the transformation of a normal cell to a cancer cell. To date, these studies have primarily focused on the role of histone modification, nucleosome location, and DNA methylation in regulating the biological consequences of infection. Using a wide variety of strategies and techniques ranging from simple ChIP to ChIP-chip and ChIP-seq to identify histone modifications, nuclease digestion to genome wide next generation sequencing to identify nucleosome location, and bisulfite treatment to MeDIP to identify DNA methylation sites, the epigenetic regulation of these viruses is slowly becoming better understood. While the viruses may differ in significant ways from each other and cellular chromatin, the role of epigenetics appears to be relatively similar. Within the viral genome nucleosomes are organized for the expression of appropriate genes with relevant histone modifications particularly histone acetylation. DNA methylation occurs as part of the typical gene silencing during latent infection by herpesviruses. In the simple tumor viruses like the polyomaviruses, adenoviruses, and papillomaviruses, transformation of the cell occurs via integration of the virus genome such that the virus's normal regulation is disrupted. This results in the unregulated expression of critical viral genes capable of redirecting cellular gene expression. The redirected cellular expression is a consequence of either indirect epigenetic regulation where cellular signaling or transcriptional dysregulation occurs or direct epigenetic regulation where epigenetic cofactors such as histone deacetylases are targeted. In the more complex herpersviruses transformation is a consequence of the expression of the viral latency proteins and RNAs which again can have either a direct or indirect effect on epigenetic regulation of cellular expression. Nevertheless, many questions still remain with respect to the specific mechanisms underlying epigenetic regulation of the viruses and transformation.

Comparisons between murine polyomavirus and Simian virus 40 show significant differences in small T antigen function

Although members of a virus family produce similar gene products, those products may have quite different functions. Simian virus 40 (SV40) large T antigen (LT), for example, targets p53 directly, but murine polyomavirus LT does not. SV40 small T antigen (SVST) has received considerable attention because of its ability to contribute to transformation of human cells. Here, we show that there are major differences between SVST and polyomavirus small T antigen (POLST) in their effects on differentiation, transformation, and cell survival. Both SVST and POLST induce cell cycle progression. However, POLST also inhibits differentiation of 3T3-L1 preadipocytes and C2C12 myoblasts. Additionally, POLST induces apoptosis of mouse embryo fibroblasts. SVST reduces the proapoptotic transcriptional activity of FOXO1 through phosphorylation. On the other hand, SVST complements large T antigen and Ras for the transformation of human mammary epithelial cells (HMECs), but POLST does not. Mechanistically, the differences between SVST and POLST may lie in utilization of protein phosphatase 2A (PP2A). POLST binds both Aα and Aβ scaffolding subunits of PP2A while SVST binds only Aα. Knockdown of Aβ could mimic POLST-induced apoptosis. The two small T antigens can target different proteins for dephosphorylation. POLST binds and dephosphorylates substrates, such as lipins, that SVST does not.

Epigenetic modulation of host: new insights into immune evasion by viruses

Viruses have evolved with their hosts, which include all living species. This has been partly responsible for the development of highly advanced immune systems in the hosts. However, viruses too have evolved ways to regulate and evade the host's immune defence. In addition to mutational mechanisms that viruses employ to mimic the host genome and undergo latency to evade the host's recognition of the pathogen, they have also developed epigenetic mechanisms by which they can render the host's immune responses inactive to their antigens. The epigenetic regulation of gene expression is intrinsically active inside the host and is involved in regulating gene expression and cellular differentiation. Viral immune evasion strategies are an area of major concern in modern biomedical research. Immune evasion strategies may involve interference with the host antigen presentation machinery or host immune gene expression capabilities, and viruses, in these manners, introduce and propagate infection. The aim of this review is to elucidate the various epigenetic changes that viruses are capable of bringing about in their host in order to enhance their own survivability and pathogenesis.