Adeno-Associated Virus Type 2 Rep68 Can Bind to Consensus Rep-Binding Sites on the Herpes Simplex Virus 1 Genome

Hepatitis D virus interferes with hepatitis B virus RNA production via interferon-dependent and -independent mechanisms

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Chronic coinfection with HBV and HDV leads to the most aggressive form of chronic viral hepatitis. Herein, we aimed to elucidate the molecular mechanisms underlying the widely reported observation that HDV interferes with HBV in most coinfected patients.

METHODS

Patient liver tissues, primary human hepatocytes, HepaRG cells and human liver chimeric mice were used to analyze the effect of HDV on HBV using virological and RNA-sequencing analyses, as well as RNA synthesis, stability and association assays.

RESULTS

Transcriptomic analyses in cell culture and mouse models of coinfection enabled us to define an HDV-induced signature, mainly composed of interferon (IFN)-stimulated genes (ISGs). We also provide evidence that ISGs are upregulated in chronically HDV/HBV-coinfected patients but not in cells that only express HDV antigen (HDAg). Inhibition of the hepatocyte IFN response partially rescued the levels of HBV parameters. We observed less HBV RNA synthesis upon HDV infection or HDV protein expression. Additionally, HDV infection or expression of HDAg alone specifically accelerated the decay of HBV RNA, and HDAg was associated with HBV RNAs. On the contrary, HDAg expression did not affect other viruses such as HCV or SARS-CoV-2.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data indicate that HDV interferes with HBV through both IFN-dependent and IFN-independent mechanisms. Specifically, we uncover a new viral interference mechanism in which proteins of a satellite virus affect the RNA production of its helper virus. Exploiting these findings could pave the way to the development of new therapeutic strategies against HBV.

IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS

Although the molecular mechanisms remained unexplored, it has long been known that despite its dependency, HDV decreases HBV viremia in patients. Herein, using in vitro and in vivo models, we showed that HDV interferes with HBV through both IFN-dependent and IFN-independent mechanisms affecting HBV RNA metabolism, and we defined the HDV-induced modulation signature. The mechanisms we uncovered could pave the way for the development of new therapeutic strategies against HBV by mimicking and/or increasing the effect of HDAg on HBV RNA. Additionally, the HDV-induced modulation signature could potentially be correlated with responsiveness to IFN-α treatment, thereby helping to guide management of HBV/HDV-coinfected patients.

The HSV-1 Transcription Factor ICP4 Confers Liquid-Like Properties to Viral Replication Compartments

Herpes Simplex Virus Type-1 (HSV-1) forms progeny in the nucleus within distinct membrane-less inclusions, the viral replication compartments (VRCs), where viral gene expression, DNA replication, and packaging occur. The way in which the VRCs maintain spatial integrity remains unresolved. Here, we demonstrate that the essential viral transcription factor ICP4 is an intrinsically disordered protein (IDP) capable of driving protein condensation and liquid–liquid phase separation (LLPS) in transfected cells. Particularly, ICP4 forms nuclear liquid-like condensates in a dose- and time-dependent manner. Fluorescence recovery after photobleaching (FRAP) assays revealed rapid exchange rates of EYFP-ICP4 between phase-separated condensates and the surroundings, akin to other viral IDPs that drive LLPS. Likewise, HSV-1 VRCs revealed by EYFP-tagged ICP4 retained their liquid-like nature, suggesting that they are phase-separated condensates. Individual VRCs homotypically fused when reaching close proximity and grew over the course of infection. Together, the results of this study demonstrate that the HSV-1 transcription factor ICP4 has characteristics of a viral IDP, forms condensates in the cell nucleus by LLPS, and can be used as a proxy for HSV-1 VRCs with characteristics of liquid–liquid phase-separated condensates.

The Interplay between Adeno-Associated Virus and its Helper Viruses

The adeno-associated virus (AAV) is a small, nonpathogenic parvovirus, which depends on helper factors to replicate. Those helper factors can be provided by coinfecting helper viruses such as adenoviruses, herpesviruses, or papillomaviruses. We review the basic biology of AAV and its most-studied helper viruses, adenovirus type 5 (AdV5) and herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1). We further outline the direct and indirect interactions of AAV with those and additional helper viruses.

Cell Cycle-Dependent Expression of Adeno-Associated Virus 2 (AAV2) Rep in Coinfections with Herpes Simplex Virus 1 (HSV-1) Gives Rise to a Mosaic of Cells Replicating either AAV2 or HSV-1

Adeno-associated virus 2 (AAV2) depends on the simultaneous presence of a helper virus such as herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV-1) for productive replication. At the same time, AAV2 efficiently blocks the replication of HSV-1, which would eventually limit its own replication by diminishing the helper virus reservoir. This discrepancy begs the question of how AAV2 and HSV-1 can coexist in a cell population. Here we show that in coinfected cultures, AAV2 DNA replication takes place almost exclusively in S/G₂-phase cells, while HSV-1 DNA replication is restricted to G₁ phase. Live microscopy revealed that not only wild-type AAV2 (wtAAV2) replication but also reporter gene expression from both single-stranded and double-stranded (self-complementary) recombinant AAV2 vectors preferentially occurs in S/G₂-phase cells, suggesting that the preference for S/G₂ phase is independent of the nature of the viral genome. Interestingly, however, a substantial proportion of S/G₂-phase cells transduced by the double-stranded but not the single-stranded recombinant AAV2 vectors progressed through mitosis in the absence of the helper virus. We conclude that cell cycle-dependent AAV2 rep expression facilitates cell cycle-dependent AAV2 DNA replication and inhibits HSV-1 DNA replication. This may limit competition for cellular and viral helper factors and, hence, creates a biological niche for either virus to replicate.IMPORTANCE Adeno-associated virus 2 (AAV2) differs from most other viruses, as it requires not only a host cell for replication but also a helper virus such as an adenovirus or a herpesvirus. This situation inevitably leads to competition for cellular resources. AAV2 has been shown to efficiently inhibit the replication of helper viruses. Here we present a new facet of the interaction between AAV2 and one of its helper viruses, herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV-1). We observed that AAV2 rep gene expression is cell cycle dependent and gives rise to distinct time-controlled windows for HSV-1 replication. High Rep protein levels in S/G₂ phase support AAV2 replication and inhibit HSV-1 replication. Conversely, low Rep protein levels in G₁ phase permit HSV-1 replication but are insufficient for AAV2 replication. This allows both viruses to productively replicate in distinct sets of dividing cells.

Novel Mutant AAV2 Rep Proteins Support AAV2 Replication without Blocking HSV-1 Helpervirus Replication

As their names imply, parvoviruses of the genus Dependovirus rely for their efficient replication on the concurrent presence of a helpervirus, such as herpesvirus, adenovirus, or papilloma virus. Adeno-associated virus 2 (AAV2) is such an example, which in turn can efficiently inhibit the replication of each helpervirus by distinct mechanisms. In a previous study we have shown that expression of the AAV2 rep gene is not compatible with efficient replication of herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV-1). In particular, the combined DNA-binding and ATPase/helicase activities of the Rep68/78 proteins have been shown to exert opposite effects on the replication of AAV2 and HSV-1. While essential for AAV2 DNA replication these protein activities account for the Rep-mediated inhibition of HSV-1 replication. Here, we describe a novel Rep mutant (Rep-D371Y), which displayed an unexpected phenotype. Rep-D371Y did not block HSV-1 replication, but still supported efficient AAV2 replication, at least when a double-stranded AAV2 genome template was used. We also found that the capacity of Rep-D371Y to induce apoptosis and a Rep-specific DNA damage response was significantly reduced compared to wild-type Rep. These findings suggest that AAV2 Rep-helicase subdomains exert diverging activities, which contribute to distinct steps of the AAV2 life cycle. More important, the novel AAV2 mutant Rep-D371Y may allow deciphering yet unsolved activities of the AAV2 Rep proteins such as DNA second-strand synthesis, genomic integration or packaging, which all involve the Rep-helicase activity.