| Literature DB >> 24846127 |
Boaz Musafia1, Rony Oren-Banaroya1, Silvia Noiman2.
Abstract
This study describes the development of aptamers as a therapy against influenza virus infection. Aptamers are oligonucleotides (like ssDNA or RNA) that are capable of binding to a variety of molecular targets with high affinity and specificity. We have studied the ssDNA aptamer BV02, which was designed to inhibit influenza infection by targeting the hemagglutinin viral protein, a protein that facilitates the first stage of the virus' infection. While testing other aptamers and during lead optimization, we realized that the dominant characteristics that determine the aptamer's binding to the influenza virus may not necessarily be sequence-specific, as with other known aptamers, but rather depend on general 2D structural motifs. We adopted QSAR (quantitative structure activity relationship) tool and developed computational algorithm that correlate six calculated structural and physicochemical properties to the aptamers' binding affinity to the virus. The QSAR study provided us with a predictive tool of the binding potential of an aptamer to the influenza virus. The correlation between the calculated and actual binding was R2 = 0.702 for the training set, and R2 = 0.66 for the independent test set. Moreover, in the test set the model's sensitivity was 89%, and the specificity was 87%, in selecting aptamers with enhanced viral binding. The most important properties that positively correlated with the aptamer's binding were the aptamer length, 2D-loops and repeating sequences of C nucleotides. Based on the structure-activity study, we have managed to produce aptamers having viral affinity that was more than 20 times higher than that of the original BV02 aptamer. Further testing of influenza infection in cell culture and animal models yielded aptamers with 10 to 15 times greater anti-viral activity than the BV02 aptamer. Our insights concerning the mechanism of action and the structural and physicochemical properties that govern the interaction with the influenza virus are discussed.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24846127 PMCID: PMC4028238 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0097696
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
The contribution of structural elements of aptamers to their affinity towards influenza virus - based on SAR comparison between aptamers.
| Set | Aptamer | Relativebinding | Length(bases) | |
|
| ||||
| BV02 | 1.0 | 68 |
| |
| A | S1 | 1.1 | 68 |
|
| S2 | 1.0 | 68 |
| |
| S3 | 0.7 | 68 |
| |
| 68 |
| |||
| BV02 | 1.0 | 68 |
| |
| B | BV19 | 1.3 | 68 |
|
| BV19g | 0.13 | 53 |
| |
| BV19h | 0.02 | 36 |
| |
|
| ||||
| BV02 | 1.0 | 68 |
| |
| C | BV14 | 1.3 | 68 |
|
| BV13 | 0.08 | 68 |
| |
| BV11 | 0.12 | 68 |
| |
|
| ||||
| BV24 | 15.0 | 30 |
| |
| D | BV24a | 0.08 | 30 |
|
| BV24b | 0.05 | 30 |
| |
| BV24c | 4.9 | 55 |
| |
| BV24d | 0.11 | 55 |
| |
| BV24e | 11.6 | 55 |
| |
|
| ||||
| BV035a | 14.6 | 55 |
| |
| BV035m | 6.5 | 55 |
| |
| E | BV035n | 7.2 | 55 |
|
| BV035o | 9.9 | 55 |
| |
| BV035p | 9.9 | 55 |
| |
| BV035q | 14.1 | 55 |
| |
|
| ||||
| BV035h | 10.4 | 59 |
| |
| BV035a | 14.6 | 55 |
| |
| F | BV035e | 0.9 | 47 |
|
| BV035f | 3.3 | 43 |
| |
| BV035g | 0.6 | 39 |
| |
|
| ||||
| BV35 | 1.01 | 55 |
| |
| G | BV35a | 14.6 | 55 |
|
| BV35b | 0.9 | 55 |
| |
| BV35c | 1.2 | 55 |
| |
|
| ||||
| H | C7-35M | 0.5 | 35 |
|
| C7C | 15.5 | 51 |
|
Relative binding refers to the ratio between IC50 of the tested aptamer and BV02 that served as a standard reference.
Figure 1Secondary structure (2D) of aptamers calculated by Mfold.
A) BV02 is the parent aptamer that was designed to influenza virus infection [12] by attaching the viral hemagglutinin protein. BV02 was selected based on its high affinity to a peptide segment of the protein. B) S1 aptamer is a scrambled aptamer with nucleotide ratio and chemo-physical properties similar to BV02 but with entirely different sequence. The binding of the random sequence aptamer to influenza virus was unexpectedly similar to BV02. C–D) BV13 and BV14 are based on BV02 sequence but the sequences that are marked in yellow were change to complementary sequence making new hairpin like secondary structures. BV13 have no internal or external loops and subsequently lost its affinity to influenza virus. BV14 maintained some of the 2D structure of BV02 and did maintain the affinity to the virus. E–F) BV35r and BV42 have large unpaired loops reach in C nucleotides. The binding affinity of these aptamers was about 15 higher than BV02. BV35r and BV42 were chosen for further investigation in-vitro and in-vivo and showed anti-influenza activity.
Descriptors relevant to aptamer binding to influenza virus.
| Name | Descriptor explanation | Descriptor Rangeof values | |||
| Average | Max | Min | SD | ||
| x1 | Total number of Bases | 55.41 | 69 | 30 | 9.16 |
| x2 | Number of calculated conformations | 1.08 | 4 | 0 | 0.59 |
| x15 | Length of longest un-paired C-stretch that may be perturbed with anysequence that is no longer than 8 nucleotides | 17.17 | 55 | 0 | 15.78 |
| x20 | Sum of un-paired nucleotides in C-stretches comprised of 3 Cs or more | 17.04 | 55 | 0 | 16.10 |
| x28 | Sum of all un-paired nucleotides | 33.24 | 55 | 4 | 9.03 |
| x31 | Size of largest loop | 22.21 | 39 | 0 | 12.58 |
| f_1 | Ratio between Sum of all un-paired nucleotides - And -Total base number = x28/x1 | 0.613 | 1 | 0.059 | 0.170 |
| f_2 | Ratio between Size of largest loop - And -Total base number = x31/x1 | 0.409 | 0.778 | 0 | 0.240 |
| f_6 | Ratio between Length of longest un-paired C-stretch that may be perturbedwith any sequence that is no longer than 8 nucleotides - And - Total basenumber = x15/x1 | 0.325 | 1.000 | 0 | 0.301 |
The full list of the descriptors that was extracted from the calculation with Mfold and analysis of the sequence is presented at supplement Table S2.
Figure 2The actual versus predicted relative binding of aptamers in training and test sets.
A) The training set actual vs. calculated chart can be seen, with R2 = 0.705 p-value: 4.5*10−14. The most important finding is the ability of the model to predict accurately which aptamers are likely to have high relative binding. The sensitivity value was 89% for the identify molecules with high relative binding (at least 9 better than BV02), and the specificity of the model was 87%. B) The model predicted well the test set as well, and showed sensitivity value of 89% for the identify molecules with high relative binding and the specificity of the model was 87%; the correlation was R2 = 0.66.
Figure 3The contribution of each descriptor to the relative activity model.
Equation 1 gives the prediction model of the calculated binding relative to BV02. Each descriptor after multiplying its value with the coefficient in the linear equation Eq1 has negative or positive value that contributes to the calculated prediction. In order to elucidate the structural features that improve the binding of aptamer to influenza virus, the chart above presents the average contributions of aptamers that had high affinity in comparison to aptamers with low affinity. (High affinity are aptamers that their relative binding was 9 times better or more then aptamer BV02; low affinity are aptamers with relative binding of 2 or less). The most profound difference that indicates the positive contribution structures to binding of the aptamers to influenza virus can be seen in f_2 and f_6 descriptors. These descriptors relates to the size of the largest loop and the size of unpaired C-stretches respectively.
Figure 4Decision tree for selecting aptamers that may have high binding affinity to influenza virus.
Decision trees were used during the aptamer optimization process as a tool to select the aptamers that should be synthesized and examined. The decision trees helped to avoid aptamers with low affinity or to enrich the aptamers with high affinity. The recursive partitioning algorithm was used to select descriptors that better differentiate the aptamers according to their binding range (see materials and methods). This tree used only two descriptors f_1 and x15 and had high sensitivity, thus it has low probability to miss high affinity aptamers. The accuracy of this model is described in table 3.
Analysis of decision tree accuracy: predicted versus actual binding.
| Calculated Low | Calculated Medium | Calculated High | ||
|
|
| 36(f) | 7 | 4 |
|
|
| 4 | 1 | 9 |
|
|
| 0 | 2 | 35 |
High affinity are aptamers that their relative binding was 9 times better or more then aptamer BV02 (>9).
Medium affinity are aptamers that their binding was between low and high (2< binding ratio <9).
Low affinity are aptamers that their binding was in the range of BV02 or worse than twice its binding (<2).
The numbers in brackets indicate the number of the aptamers according to their experimental binding.
The decision-tree predicted well (35/37) high affinity aptamers, (f) but was less successful in detecting the low affinity aptamers (36/47).
Figure 5The inhibitory effect of aptamer BV42 on the first stage of viral attachment to MDCK cell.
BV42 managed to inhibit the attachment of influenza virus (A/Texas/1/77) to MDCK host cells. The attachment of the virus to the host cells was reduced by BV42 aptamer in a dose dependent manner, the IC50 was about 1 nM. To show that the aptamer is affecting the first stage of the infection, the attachment of the virus to the host cells was done in 4°C; in this way the amount of viruses on cells refers to viruses that are attached to cells alone without the effect of the next stages of the viral infection cycle. The amount of the virus attached to the cell culture is expressed as optic density (OD) of the colorimetric product that is produced by enzyme attached to anti-influenza antibody. The inhibitory effect = 100 * [1–OD(test)/OD(no aptamer)] The error bar indicated standard error (SE).
Figure 6The inhibitory effect of aptamer BV42 on swain flu infection of MDCK cells.
BV42 inhibited the infection of host cells by the 2009 pandemic swain flu virus (H1N1 A/Perth/265/09); with EC50 of about 8 nM. MDCK cells infection was measured according to levels of virus in the cell culture as described in figure 5. The error bar indicated standard error (SE).
Figure 7The anti-viral effect of aptamers in mouse model.
The anti-viral effect of aptamers BV02, BV35r and BV42 and the anti-influenza drug zanamivir is presented. The severity of the infection was monitored according to the body weight change of each mouse along the experiment. Single intranasal treatment of equimolar amount of BV02, BV35r, BV42 (0.8 µmol/Kg) were administrated (12.5, 9.8. and 9.8 mg/Kg respectively) and 0.3 µmol/Kg of zanamivir (0.1 mg/Kg), PBS buffer served as placebo. The viral inoculum and treatment were co-administrated intranasally. BV42, BV35r and zanamivir showed significant improvement efficacy in comparison to mice treated with placebo on days 4–5. BV42 showed better effect in comparison to the other aptamers (p<0.001). The statistics is based on ANOVA for repeated measures and Post-hoc Bonferroni’s statistical analysis, (**p<0.01, ***p<0.001). The error bar indicated standard error (SE).