Differences in neuroinvasion and protective innate immune pathways between encephalitic California Serogroup orthobunyaviruses.
Journal
PLoS pathogens
ISSN: 1553-7374
Titre abrégé: PLoS Pathog
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101238921
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2022
03 2022
Historique:
received:
19
08
2021
accepted:
18
02
2022
revised:
16
03
2022
pubmed:
5
3
2022
medline:
23
4
2022
entrez:
4
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The California serogroup (CSG) of Orthobunyaviruses comprises several members capable of causing neuroinvasive disease in humans, including La Crosse orthobunyavirus (LACV), Jamestown Canyon orthobunyavirus (JCV), and Inkoo orthobunyavirus (INKV). Despite being genetically and serologically closely related, their disease incidences and pathogenesis in humans and mice differ. We have previously shown that following intraperitoneal inoculation of weanling mice, LACV was highly pathogenic while JCV and INKV were not. To determine why there were differences, we examined the ability of these viruses to invade the CNS and compared the host innate immune responses that regulated viral pathogenesis. We found that LACV was always neuroinvasive, which correlated with its high level of neuroinvasive disease. Interestingly, JCV was not neuroinvasive in any mice, while INKV was neuroinvasive in most mice. The type I interferon (IFN) response was critical for protecting mice from both JCV and INKV disease, although in the periphery JCV induced little IFN expression, while INKV induced high IFN expression. Despite their differing neuroinvasive abilities, JCV and INKV shared innate signaling components required for protection. The presence of either cytoplasmic Rig-I-Like Receptor signaling or endosomal Toll-Like Receptor signaling was sufficient to protect mice from JCV or INKV, however, inhibition of both pathways rendered mice highly susceptible to neurological disease. Comparison of IFN and IFN-stimulated gene (ISG) responses to INKV in the brains of resistant wild type (WT) mice and susceptible immune knockout mice showed similar IFN responses in the brain, but WT mice had higher ISG responses, suggesting induction of key ISGs in the brain is critical for protection of mice from INKV. Overall, these results show that the CSG viruses differ in neuroinvasiveness, which can be independent from their neuropathogenicity. The type I IFN response was crucial for protecting mice from CSG virus-induced neurological disease, however, the exact correlates of protection appear to vary between CSG viruses.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35245345
doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1010384
pii: PPATHOGENS-D-21-01717
pmc: PMC8926202
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Intramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e1010384Subventions
Organisme : Intramural NIH HHS
ID : ZIA AI001102
Pays : United States
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Emerg Infect Dis. 2019 Apr;25(4):728-738
pubmed: 30882310
Am J Pathol. 2011 Aug;179(2):783-94
pubmed: 21801870
Virology. 2017 Dec;512:201-210
pubmed: 28985574
Infect Genet Evol. 2013 Dec;20:304-11
pubmed: 24090866
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Dec 9;111(49):17432-7
pubmed: 25326418
Acta Neuropathol. 2015 Aug;130(2):233-45
pubmed: 25956408
Curr Opin Virol. 2011 Sep;1(3):167-76
pubmed: 21949557
Nat Immunol. 2006 Feb;7(2):156-64
pubmed: 16415873
Can Commun Dis Rep. 2015 Jun 04;41(6):117-123
pubmed: 29769943
J Virol. 2007 May;81(10):4991-9
pubmed: 17344298
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2015 Aug;93(2):384-9
pubmed: 26033022
Semin Immunol. 2007 Feb;19(1):24-32
pubmed: 17275323
Viruses. 2019 Aug 29;11(9):
pubmed: 31470541
J Virol. 2005 Aug;79(16):10420-8
pubmed: 16051834
J Virol. 2014 Apr;88(7):3695-704
pubmed: 24429359
Prog Clin Biol Res. 1983;123:139-44
pubmed: 6346336
Immunol Rev. 2004 Dec;202:8-32
pubmed: 15546383
Immunity. 1998 Jul;9(1):143-50
pubmed: 9697844
Front Immunol. 2019 Jan 08;9:3086
pubmed: 30671058
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015 Sep 04;64(34):929-34
pubmed: 26334477
PLoS Pathog. 2012;8(8):e1002868
pubmed: 22912583
Emerg Infect Dis. 2016 May;22(5):810-7
pubmed: 27088268
J Immunol. 2018 Jan 15;200(2):471-476
pubmed: 29246952
PLoS Pathog. 2012;8(5):e1002712
pubmed: 22615570
J Virol. 1999 Aug;73(8):6984-91
pubmed: 10400797
Nat Rev Immunol. 2014 Jan;14(1):36-49
pubmed: 24362405
PLoS One. 2015 Jul 27;10(7):e0127336
pubmed: 26214311
PLoS One. 2009 Jul 03;4(7):e6145
pubmed: 19582158
J Biol Chem. 2011 Feb 4;286(5):3681-92
pubmed: 21118815
J Virol. 2014 Oct;88(19):11070-9
pubmed: 25008929
PLoS Pathog. 2009 Oct;5(10):e1000607
pubmed: 19798431
J Neuroinflammation. 2017 Mar 24;14(1):62
pubmed: 28340587
J Virol. 2015 Mar;89(5):2462-8
pubmed: 25428874
Br J Pharmacol. 2013 Mar;168(5):1048-58
pubmed: 23072338
J Virol. 2007 Jan;81(2):860-71
pubmed: 17079283
J Virol. 1996 Feb;70(2):915-23
pubmed: 8551631
Intervirology. 2000;43(4-6):312-21
pubmed: 11251387
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Dec 9;111(49):17438-43
pubmed: 25326420
PLoS Pathog. 2013 Jan;9(1):e1003118
pubmed: 23300459
J Neurovirol. 2014 Apr;20(2):150-6
pubmed: 23846288