BACKGROUND: ST-246 is a potent anti-orthopoxviral molecule targeting the F13L protein of vaccinia virus, which is involved in the wrapping of viruses. The discrepancy in sensitivities of several orthopoxviruses to ST-246 has raised questions about potential differences in their replicative cycles and/or the presence of another drug target. METHODS: Density gradients were used to evaluate the differences between the viral cycles of vaccinia, cowpox and camelpox viruses. Also, to investigate if ST-246 inhibits a single target, we compared its activity to that of small interfering RNAs designed to silence the F13L gene (siF13Ls). RESULTS: We showed that the spread of vaccinia virus involved both intracellular and extracellular enveloped viruses, whereas both cowpox and camelpox viruses seemed to propagate via non-enveloped intracellular forms and cell-associated viral particles. Although ST-246 exerted a clear antiviral activity by interfering with the egress of the virus from infected cells, we observed that cowpox and camelpox viruses, in contrast to vaccinia virus, could be directed towards a lytic cycle under ST-246 treatment. We specifically knocked down the F13L transcripts of vaccinia and camelpox viruses by > 85%, reduced virus progeny by 90% and showed that siF13Ls affect camelpox and vaccinia virus propagation differently. Flow cytometry data validated that ST-246 interfered with the activity of the F13L protein, whereas siF13Ls silenced the F13L gene. CONCLUSIONS: Our observations support that vaccinia, cowpox and camelpox viruses exhibit different levels of sensitivity to ST-246 because of dissimilarities between their ways of propagation, and provide a better understanding of the mode of action of ST-246.
BACKGROUND: ST-246 is a potent anti-orthopoxviral molecule targeting the F13L protein of vaccinia virus, which is involved in the wrapping of viruses. The discrepancy in sensitivities of several orthopoxviruses to ST-246 has raised questions about potential differences in their replicative cycles and/or the presence of another drug target. METHODS: Density gradients were used to evaluate the differences between the viral cycles of vaccinia, cowpox and camelpox viruses. Also, to investigate if ST-246 inhibits a single target, we compared its activity to that of small interfering RNAs designed to silence the F13L gene (siF13Ls). RESULTS: We showed that the spread of vaccinia virus involved both intracellular and extracellular enveloped viruses, whereas both cowpox and camelpox viruses seemed to propagate via non-enveloped intracellular forms and cell-associated viral particles. Although ST-246 exerted a clear antiviral activity by interfering with the egress of the virus from infected cells, we observed that cowpox and camelpox viruses, in contrast to vaccinia virus, could be directed towards a lytic cycle under ST-246 treatment. We specifically knocked down the F13L transcripts of vaccinia and camelpox viruses by > 85%, reduced virus progeny by 90% and showed that siF13Ls affect camelpox and vaccinia virus propagation differently. Flow cytometry data validated that ST-246 interfered with the activity of the F13L protein, whereas siF13Ls silenced the F13L gene. CONCLUSIONS: Our observations support that vaccinia, cowpox and camelpox viruses exhibit different levels of sensitivity to ST-246 because of dissimilarities between their ways of propagation, and provide a better understanding of the mode of action of ST-246.
Authors: Sophie Duraffour; Patrick Matthys; Joost J van den Oord; Tim De Schutter; Tania Mitera; Robert Snoeck; Graciela Andrei Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-06-28 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Mike Bray; Michele Di Mascio; Fabian de Kok-Mercado; Daniel J Mollura; Elaine Jagoda Journal: Antiviral Res Date: 2010-08-13 Impact factor: 5.970
Authors: Sophie Duraffour; Barbara Mertens; Hermann Meyer; Joost J van den Oord; Tania Mitera; Patrick Matthys; Robert Snoeck; Graciela Andrei Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-02-15 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Sophie Duraffour; María M Lorenzo; Gudrun Zöller; Dimitri Topalis; Doug Grosenbach; Dennis E Hruby; Graciela Andrei; Rafael Blasco; Hermann Meyer; Robert Snoeck Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2015-01-27 Impact factor: 5.758