Ex Vivo and In Vivo CD46 Receptor Utilization by Species D Human Adenovirus Serotype 26 (HAdV26).

Human adenovirus serotype 26 (Ad26) is used as a gene-based vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and HIV-1. However, its primary receptor portfolio remains controversial, potentially including sialic acid, coxsackie and adenovirus receptor (CAR), integrins, and CD46. We and others have shown that Ad26 can use CD46, but these observations were questioned on the basis of the inability to cocrystallize Ad26 fiber with CD46. Recent work demonstrated that Ad26 binds CD46 with its hexon protein rather than its fiber. We examined the functional consequences of Ad26 for infection in vitro and in vivo. Ectopic expression of human CD46 on Chinese hamster ovary cells increased Ad26 infection significantly. Deletion of the complement control protein domain CCP1 or CCP2 or the serine-threonine-proline (STP) region of CD46 reduced infection. Comparing wild-type and sialic acid-deficient CHO cells, we show that the usage of CD46 is independent of its sialylation status. Ad26 transduction was increased in CD46 transgenic mice after intramuscular (i.m.) injection but not after intranasal (i.n.) administration. Ad26 transduction was 10-fold lower than Ad5 transduction after intratumoral (i.t.) injection of CD46-expressing tumors. Ad26 transduction of liver was 1,000-fold lower than that ofAd5 after intravenous (i.v.) injection. These data demonstrate the use of CD46 by Ad26 in certain situations but also show that the receptor has little consequence by other routes of administration. Finally, i.v. injection of high doses of Ad26 into CD46 mice induced release of liver enzymes into the bloodstream and reduced white blood cell counts but did not induce thrombocytopenia. This suggests that Ad26 virions do not induce direct clotting side effects seen during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination with this serotype of adenovirus. IMPORTANCE The human species D Ad26 is being investigated as a low-seroprevalence vector for oncolytic virotherapy and gene-based vaccination against HIV-1 and SARS-CoV-2. However, there is debate in the literature about its tropism and receptor utilization, which directly influence its efficiency for certain applications. This work was aimed at determining which receptor(s) this virus uses for infection and its role in virus biology, vaccine efficacy, and, importantly, vaccine safety.

Comparison of Liver Detargeting Strategies for Systemic Therapy with Oncolytic Adenovirus Serotype 5.

Oncolytic viruses would ideally be of use for systemic therapy to treat disseminated cancer. To do this safely, this may require multiple layers of cancer specificity. The pharmacology and specificity of oncolytic adenoviruses can be modified by (1) physical retargeting, (2) physical detargeting, (3) chemical shielding, or (4) by modifying the ability of viral early gene products to selectively activate in cancer versus normal cells. We explored the utility of these approaches with oncolytic adenovirus serotype 5 (Ad5) in immunocompetent Syrian hamsters bearing subcutaneous HaK tumors. After a single intravenous injection to reach the distant tumors, the physically hepatocyte-detargeted virus Ad5-hexon-BAP was more effective than conditionally replicating Ad5-dl1101/07 with mutations in its E1A protein. When these control or Ad5 treated animals were treated a second time by intratumoral injection, prior exposure to Ad5 did not affect tumor growth, suggesting that anti-Ad immunity neither prevented treatment nor amplified anti-tumor immune responses. Ad5-dl1101/07 was next chemically shielded with polyethylene glycol (PEG). While 5 kDa of PEG blunted pro-inflammatory IL-6 production induced by Ad5-dl1101/07, this shielding reduced Ad oncolytic activity.

Evaluation of polymer shielding for adenovirus serotype 6 (Ad6) for systemic virotherapy against human prostate cancers.

Oncolytic viruses hold promise as "self-amplifying" cancer therapies wherein a virally killed cell can produce thousands of new viral "drugs" that can kill more cancer cells. Adenoviruses (Ads) are one family of oncolytic viruses. Most human studies have used human Ad serotype 5 (Ad5). Unfortunately, most patients are already immune to Ad5 increasing the likelihood that the agent will be neutralized if used as a cancer therapy. In this work, lower seroprevalence Ad6 was tested as a systemic therapy for prostate cancer. Ad5 and Ad6 were injected intravenously a single time in nude mice bearing human prostate tumors, and toxicity and efficacy were assessed. Ad6 was chemically shielded with polyethylene glycol (PEG) to test if this would further improve its pharmacology. Ad6 produced 30-fold lower liver damage and less toxicity than Ad5. Ad6 significantly repressed the growth of androgen-resistant human DU145 prostate tumors and androgen-sensitive LNCaP tumors after single intravenous injection. PEGylation did not change virus distribution, but blunted liver damage and cytokine production by Ad6. PEGylated Ad6 eradicated LNCaP tumors and maintained body mass, but lost potency against the more challenging DU145 tumors. These and other data suggest that low seroprevalent Ad6 has better efficacy and safety than the benchmark oncolytic virus Ad5 for systemic therapy of prostate cancer. These data also indicate that PEGylation may improve Ad6 safety, but that this shielding may reduce oncolytic efficacy after intravenous treatment.

Comparison of the Life Cycles of Genetically Distant Species C and Species D Human Adenoviruses Ad6 and Ad26 in Human Cells.

UNLABELLED: Our understanding of adenovirus (Ad) biology is largely extrapolated from human species C Ad5. Most humans are immune to Ad5, so lower-seroprevalence viruses like human Ad6 and Ad26 are being tested as therapeutic vectors. Ad6 and Ad26 differ at the DNA level by 34%. To better understand how this might impact their biology, we examined the life cycle of the two viruses in human lung cells in vitro. Both viruses infected A549 cells with similar efficiencies, executed DNA replication with identical kinetics within 12 h, and began killing cells within 72 h. While Ad6-infected cells remained adherent until death, Ad26-infected cells detached within 12 h of infection but remained viable. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of mRNA from infected cells demonstrated that viral transcripts constituted 1% of cellular mRNAs within 6 h and 8 to 16% within 12 h. Quantitative PCR and NGS revealed the activation of key early genes at 6 h and transition to late gene activation by 12 h by both viruses. There were marked differences in the balance of E1A and E1B activation by the two viruses and in the expression of E3 immune evasion mRNAs. Ad6 was markedly more effective at suppressing major histocompatibility complex class I (MHC I) display on the cell surface and in evading TRAIL-mediated apoptosis than was Ad26. These data demonstrate shared as well as divergent life cycles in these genetically distant human adenoviruses. An understanding of these differences expands the knowledge of alternative Ad species and may inform the selection of related Ads for therapeutic development. IMPORTANCE: A burgeoning number of adenoviruses (Ads) are being harnessed as therapeutics, yet the biology of these viruses is generally extrapolated from Ad2 and Ad5. Here, we are the first to compare the transcriptional programs of two genetically distant Ads by mRNA next-generation sequencing (NGS). Species C Ad6 and Ad26 are being pursued as lower-seroprevalence Ad vectors but differ at the DNA level by 34%. Head-to-head comparison in human lung cells by NGS revealed that the two viruses generally conform to our general understanding of the Ad transcriptional program. However, fine mapping revealed subtle and strong differences in how these two viruses execute these programs, including differences in the balance of E1A and E1B mRNAs and in E3 immune evasion genes. This suggests that not all adenoviruses behave like Ad2 and Ad5 and that they may have unique strategies to infect cells and evade the immune system.

Mucosal vaccination by adenoviruses displaying reovirus sigma 1.

We developed adenovirus serotype 5 (Ad5) vectors displaying the sigma 1 protein from reovirus as mucosal vaccines. Ad5-sigma retargets to JAM-1 and sialic acid, but has 40-fold reduced gene delivery when compared to Ad5. While weaker at transduction, Ad5-sigma generates stronger T cell responses than Ad5 when used for mucosal immunization. In this work, new Ad5-fiber-sigma vectors were generated by varying the number of fiber ß-spiral shaft repeats (R) between the fiber tail and sigma. Increasing chimera length led to decreasing insertion of these proteinsAd5 virions. Ad-R3 and R14 vectors effectively targeted JAM-1 in vitro while R20 did not. When wereused to immunize mice by the intranasal route, Ad5-R3-sigma produced higher serum and vaginal antibody responses than Ad5. These data suggest optimized Ad-sigma vectors may be useful vectors for mucosal vaccination.

CD46-mediated transduction of a species D adenovirus vaccine improves mucosal vaccine efficacy.

The high levels of preexisting immunity against Adenovirus type 5 (Ad5) have deemed Ad5 unusable for translation as a human vaccine vector. Low seroprevalent alternative viral vectors may be less impacted by preexisting immunity, but they may also have significantly different phenotypes from that of Ad5. In this study we compare species D Ads (26, 28, and 48) to the species C Ad5. In vitro transduction studies show striking differences between the species C and D viruses. Most notably, Ad26 transduced human dendritic cells much more effectively than Ad5. In vivo imaging studies showed strikingly different transgene expression profiles. The Ad5 virus was superior to the species D viruses in BALB/c mice when delivered intramuscularly. However, the inverse was true when the viruses were delivered mucosally via the intranasal epithelia. Intramuscular transduction was restored in mice that ubiquitously expressed human CD46, the primary receptor for species D viruses. We analyzed both species C and D Ads for their ability to induce prophylactic immunity against influenza in the CD46 transgenic mouse model. Surprisingly, the species D vaccines again failed to induce greater levels of protective immunity as compared with the species C Ad5 when delivered intramuscularly. However, the species D Ad vaccine vector, Ad48, induced significantly greater protection as compared with Ad5 when delivered mucosally via the intranasal route in CD46 transgenic mice. These data shed light on the complexities between the species and types of Ad. Our findings indicate that more research will be required to identify the mechanisms that play a key role in the induction of protective immunity induced by species D Ad vaccines.

Broadly neutralizing immune responses against hepatitis C virus induced by vectored measles viruses and a recombinant envelope protein booster.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection remains a serious public health problem worldwide. Treatments are limited, and no preventive vaccine is available. Toward developing an HCV vaccine, we engineered two recombinant measles viruses (MVs) expressing structural proteins from the prototypic HCV subtype 1a strain H77. One virus directs the synthesis of the HCV capsid (C) protein and envelope glycoproteins (E1 and E2), which fold properly and form a heterodimer. The other virus expresses the E1 and E2 glycoproteins separately, with each one fused to the cytoplasmic tail of the MV fusion protein. Although these hybrid glycoproteins were transported to the plasma membrane, they were not incorporated into MV particles. Immunization of MV-susceptible, genetically modified mice with either vector induced neutralizing antibodies to MV and HCV. A boost with soluble E2 protein enhanced titers of neutralizing antibody against the homologous HCV envelope. In animals primed with MV expressing properly folded HCV C-E1-E2, boosting also induced cross-neutralizating antibodies against two heterologous HCV strains. These results show that recombinant MVs retain the ability to induce MV-specific humoral immunity while also eliciting HCV neutralizing antibodies, and that anti-HCV immunity can be boosted with a single dose of purified E2 protein. The use of MV vectors could have advantages for pediatric HCV vaccination.