Characterization of virus‒host recombinant variants of the hepatitis E virus.

Hepatitis E virus is a single-strand, positive-sense RNA virus that can lead to chronic infection in immunocompromised patients. Virus-host recombinant variants (VHRVs) have been described in such patients. These variants integrate part of human genes into the polyproline-rich region that could introduce new post-translational modifications (PTMs), such as ubiquitination. The aim of this study was to characterize the replication capacity of different VHRVs, namely, RNF19A, ZNF787, KIF1B, EEF1A1, RNA18, RPS17, and RPL6. We used a plasmid encoding the Kernow strain, in which the fragment encoding the S17 insertion was deleted (Kernow p6 delS17) or replaced by fragments encoding the different insertions. The HEV RNA concentrations in the supernatants and the HepG2/C3A cell lysates were determined via RT-qPCR. The capsid protein ORF2 was immunostained. The effect of ribavirin was also assessed. The HEV RNA concentrations in the supernatants and the cell lysates were higher for the variants harboring the RNF19A, ZNF787, KIF1B, RPS17, and EEF1A1 insertions than for the Kernow p6 del S17, while it was not with RNA18 or RPL6 fragments. The number of ORF2 foci was higher for RNF19A, ZNF787, KIF1B, and RPS17 than for Kernow p6 del S17. VHRVs with replicative advantages were less sensitive to the antiviral effect of ribavirin. No difference in PTMs was found between VHRVs with a replicative advantage and those without. In conclusion, our study showed that insertions did not systematically confer a replicative advantage in vitro. Further studies are needed to determine the mechanisms underlying the differences in replicative capacity. IMPORTANCE: Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is a major cause of viral hepatitis. HEV can lead to chronic infection in immunocompromised patients. Ribavirin treatment is currently used to treat such chronic infections. Recently, seven virus-host recombinant viruses were characterized in immunocompromised patients. These viruses have incorporated a portion of a human gene fragment into their genome. We studied the consequences of these insertions on the replication capacity. We found that these inserted fragments could enhance virus replication for five of the seven recombinant variants. We also showed that the recombinant variants with replicative advantages were less sensitive to ribavirin in vitro. Finally, we found that the mechanisms leading to such a replicative advantage do not seem to rely on the post-translational modifications introduced by the human gene fragment that could have modified the function of the viral protein. The mechanisms involved in improving the replication of such recombinant viruses remain to be explored.

Current immunoassays and detection of antibodies elicited by Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The present study aimed to determine whether current commercial immunoassays are adequate for detecting anti-Omicron antibodies. We analyzed the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody response of 23 unvaccinated individuals 1-2 months after an Omicron infection. All blood samples were tested with a live virus neutralization assay using a clinical Omicron BA.1 strain and four commercial SARS-CoV-2 immunoassays. We assessed three anti-Spike immunoassays (SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant [Abbott S], Wantaï anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody ELISA [Wantaï], Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S assay [Roche]) and one anti-Nucleocapsid immunoassay (Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay [Abbott N]). Omicron neutralizing antibodies were detected in all samples with the live virus neutralization assay. The detection rate of the Abbott S, Wantai, Roche, and Abbott N immunoassays were 65.2%, 69.6%, 86.9%, and 91.3%, respectively. The sensitivities of Abbott S and Wantai immunoassays were significantly lower than that of the live virus neutralization assay (p = 0.004, p = 0.009; Fisher's exact test). Antibody concentrations obtained with anti-S immunoassays were correlated with Omicron neutralizing antibody concentrations. These data provide clinical evidence of the loss of performance of some commercial immunoassays to detect antibodies elicited by Omicron infections. It highlights the need to optimize these assays by adapting antigens to the circulating SARS-CoV-2 strains.

Antibody Titers and Protection against Omicron (BA.1 and BA.2) SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

The emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern has greatly influenced the immune correlates of protection, and there are little data about the antibody threshold concentrations to protect against infection with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 or BA.2. We analyzed the antibody responses of 259 vaccinated healthcare workers, some of whom had been previously infected by SARS-CoV-2. The median follow-up was 179 days (IQR: 171-182) after blood collection. We detected 88 SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infections during the follow-up period, 55 (62.5%) with SARS-CoV-2 BA.1, and 33 (37.5%) with SARS-CoV-2 BA.2. A neutralizing antibody titer below 8 provided no protection against a BA.1 infection, a titer of 16 or 32 gave 73.2% protection, and a titer of 64 or 128 provided 78.4% protection. Conversely, the BA.2 infection rate did not vary as a function of anti-BA.2 neutralizing antibody titers. Binding antibody concentrations below 6000 BAU/mL provided no protection against Omicron BA.1 infection, 6000-20,000 BAU/mL provided 55.6% protection, and 20,000 or more provided 87.7% protection. There was no difference in BA.2 infection depending on the binding antibody concentration. Further studies are needed to investigate the relationship between antibody concentrations and infection with the Omicron BA.4/5 variants that are becoming predominant worldwide.

Decreased Efficiency of Neutralizing Antibodies from Previously Infected or Vaccinated Individuals against the B.1.617.2 (Delta) SARS-CoV-2 Variant.

The neutralizing antibody response is a key component of adaptive immunity and a primary protection against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The increased transmissibility of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant and its capacity to cause more severe disease could be linked to a significant reduction in neutralizing antibodies generated during a previous infection or vaccination. We analyzed blood samples from 162 unvaccinated health care workers (HCWs) collected 1 to 3 months postinfection and from 263 vaccinated health care workers 1 month after the last injection. We have compared the neutralizing antibody titers obtained using two virus strains, B.1.160 and B.1.617.2 (Delta variant). Binding antibody concentrations were measured by an immunoassay. The median neutralizing antibody titer against the B.1.160 strain was 128 (interquartile range [IQR], 16 to 256) and 32 (IQR, 8 to 128) against the Delta variant. To obtain a neutralizing antibody titer of 32 or 64, a binding antibody concentration of 182 binding antibody units (BAU)/mL (IQR, 81 to 974) was required with the strain B.1.160, while a concentration of 2,595 BAU/mL (IQR, 1,176 to 5,353) was required with the Delta variant. Our data indicate that antibodies neutralize the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant 4 times less efficiently than they neutralize an earlier strain. Half of the HCWs had decreased protection from 94% to 76.8% or less for the same total antibody concentration. But neutralization might be correlated with other immune responses. The contributions of other responses, such as those of the T cell and B cell systems, to protection require further investigation. IMPORTANCE Recent studies showed that the neutralizing antibody titer is an important contributor to protection against SARS-CoV-2. With the emergence of new variants, the question arises of maintaining the neutralizing capacities of vaccines and/or of a past infection. We had protective data associated with total antibody concentrations and neutralizing antibody titers for a B.1.160 strain. We showed that to maintain the same levels of protection and, therefore, the same levels of neutralizing antibodies, a total antibody concentration 8.5 times greater is required with the Delta strain. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT04385108.).

Diagnostic Performance of an Automated System for Assaying Anti-Hepatitis E Virus Immunoglobulins M and G Compared with a Conventional Microplate Assay.

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the Liaison® Murex anti-HEV IgM and IgG assays running on the Liaison® instrument and compare the results with those obtained with Wantai HEV assays. We tested samples collected in immunocompetent and immunocompromised patients during the acute (HEV RNA positive, anti-HEV IgM positive) and the post-viremic phase (HEV RNA negative, anti-HEV IgM positive) of infections. The specificity was assessed by testing HEV RNA negative/anti-HEV IgG-IgM negative samples. The clinical sensitivity of the Liaison® IgM assay was 100% for acute-phase samples (56/56) and 57.4% (27/47) for post-viremic samples from immunocompetent patients. It was 93.8% (30/32) for acute-phase (viremic) samples and 71%% (22/31) for post-viremic samples from immunocompromised patients. The clinical sensitivity of the Liaison® IgG assay was 100% for viremic samples (56/56) and 94.6% (43/47) for post-viremic samples from immunocompetent patients. It was 84.3% (27/32) for viremic samples and 93.5% (29/31) for post-viremic samples from immunocompromised patients. Specificity was very high (>99%) in both populations. We checked the limit of detection stated for the Liaison® IgG assay (0.3 U/mL). The clinical performance of the Liaison® ANTI-HEV assays was good. These rapid, automated assays for detecting anti-HEV antibodies will greatly enhance the arsenal for diagnosing HEV infections.

Vectorial Release of Human RNA Viruses from Epithelial Cells.

Epithelial cells are apico-basolateral polarized cells that line all tubular organs and are often targets for infectious agents. This review focuses on the release of human RNA virus particles from both sides of polarized human cells grown on transwells. Most viruses that infect the mucosa leave their host cells mainly via the apical side while basolateral release is linked to virus propagation within the host. Viruses do this by hijacking the cellular factors involved in polarization and trafficking. Thus, understanding epithelial polarization is essential for a clear understanding of virus pathophysiology.

Evaluation of Three Quantitative Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Immunoassays.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in December 2019 and caused a dramatic pandemic. Serological assays are used to check for immunization and assess herd immunity. We evaluated commercially available assays designed to quantify antibodies directed to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike (S) antigen, either total (Wantaï SARS-CoV-2 Ab ELISA) or IgG (SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant on Alinity, Abbott, and Liaison SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG, Diasorin). The specificities of the Wantaï, Alinity, and Liaison assays were evaluated using 100 prepandemic sera and were 98, 99, and 97%, respectively. The sensitivities of all three were around 100% when tested on 35 samples taken 15 to 35 days postinfection. They were less sensitive for 150 sera from late infections (>180 days). Using the first WHO international standard (NIBSC), we showed that the Wantai results were concordant with the NIBSC values, while Liaison and Alinity showed a proportional bias of 1.3 and 7, respectively. The results of the 3 immunoassays were significantly globally pairwise correlated and for late infection sera (P < 0.001). They were correlated for recent infection sera measured with Alinity and Liaison (P < 0.001). However, the Wantai results of recent infections were not correlated with those from Alinity or Liaison. All the immunoassay results were significantly correlated with the neutralizing antibody titers obtained using a live virus neutralization assay with the B1.160 SARS-CoV-2 strain. These assays will be useful once the protective anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titer has been determined. IMPORTANCE Standardization and correlation with virus neutralization assays are critical points to compare the performance of serological assays designed to quantify anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in order to identify their optimal use. We have evaluated three serological immunoassays based on the virus spike antigen that detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies: a microplate assay and two chemiluminescent assays performed with Alinity (Abbott) and Liaison (Diasorin) analysers. We used an in-house live virus neutralization assay and the first WHO international standard to assess the comparison. This study could be useful to determine guidelines on the use of serological results to manage vaccination and treatment with convalescent plasma or monoclonal antibodies.

Optimized Hepatitis E Virus (HEV) Culture and its Application to Measurements of HEV Infectivity.

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is a major concern in public health worldwide. Infections with HEV genotypes 3, 4, or 7 can lead to chronic hepatitis while genotype 1 infections can trigger severe hepatitis in pregnant women. Infections with all genotypes can worsen chronic liver diseases. As virions are lipid-associated in blood and naked in feces, efficient methods of propagating HEV clinical strains in vitro and evaluating the infectivity of both HEV forms are needed. We evaluated the spread of clinical strains of HEV genotypes 1 (HEV1) and 3 (HEV3) by quantifying viral RNA in culture supernatants and cell lysates. Infectivity was determined by endpoint dilution and calculation of the tissue culture infectious dose 50 (TCID50). An enhanced HEV production could be obtained varying the composition of the medium, including fetal bovine serum (FBS) and dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) content. This increased TCID50 from 10 to 100-fold and allowed us to quantify HEV1 infectivity. These optimized methods for propagating and measuring HEV infectivity could be applied to health safety processes and will be useful for testing new antiviral drugs.

Classification of the Zoonotic Hepatitis E Virus Genotype 3 Into Distinct Subgenotypes.

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) genotype 3 is the most common genotype linked to HEV infections in Europe and America. Three major clades (HEV-3.1, HEV-3.2, and HEV-3.3) have been identified but the overlaps between intra-subtype and inter-subtype p-distances make subtype classification inconsistent. Reference sequences have been proposed to facilitate communication between researchers and new putative subtypes have been identified recently. We have used the full or near full-length HEV-3 genome sequences available in the Genbank database (April 2020; n = 503) and distance analyses of clades HEV-3.1 and HEV-3.2 to determine a p-distance cut-off (0.093 nt substitutions/site) in order to define subtypes. This could help to harmonize HEV-3 genotyping, facilitate molecular epidemiology studies and investigations of the biological and clinical differences between HEV-3 subtypes.

Hepatitis E virus infections in Europe.

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is the most common cause of acute viral hepatitis worldwide. The systematic use of improved tools for diagnosing and genotyping has completely changed our understanding of the epidemiology and clinical consequences of HEV infection. Most cases of HEV in Europe arise from infected animals such as pigs, wild boar, deer and rabbits. Zoonotic HEV genotypes (HEV genotypes 3-8) are mainly food-borne or transmitted by direct contact, but recent data suggest that infection can also be water-borne or even iatrogenic throught contamined blood products. HEV-3 is the most prevalent genotype in Europe but the geographic distributions of the 3 major clades and subgenotypes (HEV-3abjkchi, HEV-3efg, and HEV-3ra) differ. Most HEV-3 infections are asymptomatic but they can result in severe acute hepatitis in patients with chronic liver disease, chronic hepatitis in immunocompromised patients, and to extra-hepatic manifestations. Despite more frequent reports of symptomatic hepatitis E cases across Europe, systems for monitoring HEV infections vary greatly. Severe HEV-associated illnesses, hospitalizations and deaths are probably underestimated. The seroprevalence and incidence of locally acquired hepatitis E varies between and within European countries and over time. The precise origin of these variations is uncertain but may be linked to environmental factors or the degree to which HEV contaminates the human food chain. Collaborative initiatives such as the establishment of the One Health platform for HEV sequences (HEVnet database) will be very useful for a better understanding of the epidemiology of HEV in Europe and the development of effective prevention strategies.

Vectorial Release of Hepatitis E Virus in Polarized Human Hepatocytes.

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is a common cause of acute viral hepatitis worldwide. Most HEV infections are asymptomatic, but immunocompromised patients infected with HEV genotype 3 (HEV3), HEV4, or HEV7 may develop chronic infections. The HEV particles in stools are naked (nHEV), while those in the serum and culture supernatants (eHEV) are associated with lipids. Hepatocytes are polarized epithelial cells that have basolateral (oriented toward the blood) and apical (oriented toward the bile) exosomal pathways. We isolated a subclone, F2, from the human hepatocarcinoma cell line HepG2/C3A that grew as a polarized monolayer culture and had better HEV production than HepG2/C3A cells. F2 cells cultured on semipermeable collagen inserts and infected basolaterally with nHEV3 released 94.6% of virus particles apically, those infected with eHEV3 released 96.8% apically, and eHEV1-infected cells released 99.3% apically. Transcytosis was not involved. Density gradient centrifugation and NP-40 treatment showed that HEV particles released both apically and basolaterally were lipid associated. The apically released HEV3 and HEV1 particles were six and nine times more infectious than those released basolaterally, respectively. Confocal microscopy indicated that the open reading frame 2 (ORF2) capsid protein colocalized apically with ORF3 virus protein, the apical marker DPP4, and the recycling endosome GTPase Rab27a. The amounts of soluble glycosylated ORF2 secreted apically and basolaterally were similar. These polarized-hepatocyte data suggest that infectious HEV particles are mainly released into bile, while the small fraction released into blood could spread HEV throughout the host.IMPORTANCE Hepatitis E virus (HEV) in stools is naked, while that in culture supernatants and patients' blood is lipid associated. Its life cycle in hepatocytes, polarized cells with a basolateral side communicating with blood and an apical side connected with bile, is incompletely understood. We have developed a polarized hepatocyte model and used the cells to analyze the supernatants bathing the apical and basolateral sides and HEV subcellular distribution. HEV particles from both sides were lipid associated, and most infectious HEV particles left the cell via its apical side. Similar amounts of the open reading frame 2 (ORF2) soluble capsid protein were secreted from both sides of the hepatocytes. This model mimicking physiological conditions should help clarify the HEV cell cycle in polarized hepatocytes.

A fully automated system using transcription-mediated amplification for the molecular diagnosis of hepatitis E virus in human blood and faeces.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the performance of the Procleix HEV RNA assay implemented on the Panther automated platform for detecting HEV RNA. STUDY DESIGN AND RESULTS: Analytical specificity was 100% and there was no cross contamination, as assessed by assaying 122 plasma samples from HEV RNA-negative blood donors. The limits of detection were determined by Probit analysis with the WHO HEV standard (HEV subtype 3a) and subtype 3f and 3c reference strains. The limit of detection was 24 [CI 95%: 19-33] IU/ml for subtype 3a, 34 [28-44] IU/ml for subtype 3c and 53 [41-76] IU/ml for subtype 3f. Inclusivity was assessed by testing 91 samples: HEV genotype 3 subtypes 3c (n = 29), 3e (n = 8), 3f (n = 50), genotype 4 (n = 3), and genotype 1 (n = 1). All the samples tested positive. Clinical performance was determined by testing prospectively 500 consecutive plasma samples and 19 faecal samples with the Procleix assay and a reference accredited quantitative RT-PCR assay. The assays were concordant for 492/500 plasma samples (98.4%) and 18/19 (94.7%) fecal samples. We also tested 92 IgM-positive/HEV RNA-negative samples with the reference assay. The IgM-positive samples included 43 (46%) that tested negative with the reference RT-PCR assay and positive with the Procleix HEV assay. CONCLUSIONS: The Procleix HEV assay performed well and appears to be suitable for molecular diagnosis of HEV infection, monitoring HEV infections, and facilitating epidemiological investigations.

[Hepatitis E virus: from the infected organism to the cellular response]. / Virus de l'hépatite E : de l'organisme infecté à la réponse cellulaire.

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) presents a worldwide distribution. In developing countries, hepatitis E, related to HEV1 and HEV2, is a waterborne disease. In developed countries, hepatitis E is a zoonotic disease due to HEV3 and HEV4. It is mainly transmitted through meat consumption from animal reservoirs such as pig, boar, deer and rabbit. New clinical forms include neurological manifestations that are now clearly associated with HEV3 infection. Recent studies showed that ORF1 polyprotein was able to disrupt the innate immune response. It was also shown that ORF2 protein exists at least in two forms: a free, glycosylated form and a non-glycosylated form, which assembles to form the capsid. Lastly, it was shown that ORF3 protein, involved in the virus egress, acts as a viroporin. New culture systems and animal models have been developed recently, and will be very helpful to complete our understanding of HEV life cycle and pathogenesis.