Trypanosoma brucei is the causative agent of African sleeping sickness in humans and one of several pathogens that cause the related veterinary disease Nagana. A complex co-evolution has occurred between these parasites and primates that led to the emergence of trypanosome-specific defences and counter-measures. The first line of defence in humans and several other catarrhine primates is the trypanolytic protein apolipoprotein-L1 (APOL1) found within two serum protein complexes, trypanosome lytic factor 1 and 2 (TLF-1 and TLF-2). Two sub-species of T. brucei have evolved specific mechanisms to overcome this innate resistance, Trypanosoma brucei gambiense and Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense. In T. b. rhodesiense, the presence of the serum resistance associated (SRA) gene, a truncated variable surface glycoprotein (VSG), is sufficient to confer resistance to lysis. The resistance mechanism of T. b. gambiense is more complex, involving multiple components: reduction in binding affinity of a receptor for TLF, increased cysteine protease activity and the presence of the truncated VSG, T. b. gambiense-specific glycoprotein (TgsGP). In a striking example of co-evolution, evidence is emerging that primates are responding to challenge by T. b. gambiense and T. b. rhodesiense, with several populations of humans and primates displaying resistance to infection by these two sub-species.
Trypanosoma brucei is the causative agent of African sleeping sickness in humans and one of several pathogens that cause the related veterinary disease Nagana. A complex co-evolution has occurred between these parasites and primates that led to the emergence of trypanosome-specific defences and counter-measures. The first line of defence in humans and several other catarrhine primates is the trypanolytic protein apolipoprotein-L1 (APOL1) found within two serum protein complexes, trypanosome lytic factor 1 and 2 (TLF-1 and TLF-2). Two sub-species of T. brucei have evolved specific mechanisms to overcome this innate resistance, Trypanosoma brucei gambiense and Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense. In T. b. rhodesiense, the presence of the serum resistance associated (SRA) gene, a truncated variable surface glycoprotein (VSG), is sufficient to confer resistance to lysis. The resistance mechanism of T. b. gambiense is more complex, involving multiple components: reduction in binding affinity of a receptor for TLF, increased cysteine protease activity and the presence of the truncated VSG, T. b. gambiense-specific glycoprotein (TgsGP). In a striking example of co-evolution, evidence is emerging that primates are responding to challenge by T. b. gambiense and T. b. rhodesiense, with several populations of humans and primates displaying resistance to infection by these two sub-species.
Trypanosoma brucei is the causative agent of African sleeping
sickness in humans and one of several species that causes the related veterinary
disease Nagana. Both diseases have a wide distribution across sub-Saharan Africa and
affect some of the poorest areas of the world. Trypanosoma brucei
is traditionally segregated into three morphologically identical sub-species based
on host, geography and pathology, although the polyphyletic nature of the three
sub-species and evidence for mating between them makes grouping them as such
problematic. Trypanosoma brucei brucei is limited to domestic and
wild animals throughout sub-Saharan Africa and is non-infective to humans (and some
primates) due to sensitivity to trypanosome lytic factors (TLF) found in its serum
(Seed and Sechelski, 1990; Lugli et
al.
2004). Trypanosoma bruceigambiense and Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense are human
infective sub-species, named due to their relative geographic locations.
Trypanosoma b. gambiense is found in Western and Central
sub-Saharan African and causes a chronic infection that can persist for many years
before symptoms appear (Gibson, 1986). It
appears to be largely a disease limited to humans, although some animal reservoirs
have been described (Gibson et al.
1978; Mehlitz, 1979; Felgner et al.
1981; Mehlitz et al.
1981, 1982; Zillmann et al.
1984). Trypanosoma b.
rhodesiense is found in a limited but expanding area of Eastern sub-Saharan
Africa, and there is a large potential animal reservoir in wild and domesticated
animals (Welburn et al.
2001; Fèvre et
al. 2001, 2005; Odiit et al.
2005). This sub-species causes a more acute
form of the disease than T. b. gambiense (Gibson, 2002), although T. b.
gambiense is by far the more prevalent human-infective sub-species and is
responsible for more than 97% of human cases (World Health Organization,
2006; Simarro et al.
2011). The evolution of TLF in primates and
the adaptations of T. brucei sub-species to resist lysis represent
an excellent example of the co-evolutionary arms race between host and parasite.
HUMAN RESISTANCE TO TRYPANOSOME INFECTION
It has been known for more than a century that a component found in the serum of
several primates, including humans, is toxic to trypanosomes (Fig. 1) (Laveran and Mesnil, 1912). After exposure to human serum, most trypanosomes are
rapidly lysed with a defined morphology (Pays et al.
2006). Lysis is preceded by a
characteristic swelling of the lysosome, suggesting that this organelle is
intimately involved in the process. Fractionation of human serum identified a
specific high-density lipoprotein (HDL) particle approximately 500 kDa in
size that was able to lyse trypanosomes (Rifkin, 1978,
; Hajduk et al.
1989). This particle was originally termed
the TLF but later renamed TLF-1 after the discovery of a second particle, a high
molecular weight serum protein-binding complex related to TLF-1 that was
consequently named TLF-2 (Raper et al.
1996). Both TLF-1 and TLF-2 contain the
same protein complement: apolipoprotein A1 (APOA1), apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1) and
haptoglobin-related protein (HPR), although TLF-1 is predominantly composed of lipid
while TLF-2 is lipid poor (Raper et al.
2001). Despite this, TLF-2 is a much larger
particle than TLF-1 due to being bound to several IgM molecules (Tomlinson
et al.
1995; Raper et al.
1996). Considerable effort and much debate
has focused on determining the trypanolytic component of TLF, largely focusing on
TLF-1 as a result of the difficulty of purifying active TLF-2 ex
vivo (Tomlinson et al.
1995; Raper et al.
1996). Investigation has centred on the two
primate-specific proteins found in TLF, i.e. HPR and APOL1, both of which are the
result of tandem gene duplication events during primate evolution. HPR is a
haemoglobin binding protein with high sequence similarity to the haem scavenger
protein haptoglobin (HP). Found within the same HDL complex as HPR, APOL1 is a
lipid-binding protein that possesses both a secretory signal peptide and a Bcl-2
homology 3 (BH3) domain (Duchateau et al.
1997; Wan et al.
2008; Zhaorigetu et al.
2008). The BH3 domain is an important
pro-apoptotic regulator of autophagy in many cell types (Lutz, 2000) and APOL1 itself appears to be able to induce autophagy
if over-expressed in cell lines, indicating it may have a role in vertebrate
controlled cell death (Zhaorigetu et al.
2008). APOL1 mutations are also associated
with various pathologies, including schizophrenia and chronic kidney diseases
(Mimmack et al.
2002; Genovese et al.
2010; Tzur et al.
2010).
Fig. 1.
APOL gene cluster of various primate species. The complement of APOL
genes and pseudogenes in several primate genera. The proposed genomic
arrangement for each genus is shown, with pseudogenes indicated by
ψ and *. The potential for
the species’ serum to lyse T. brucei is also
indicated (adapted from Smith and Malik, 2009).
APOL gene cluster of various primate species. The complement of APOL
genes and pseudogenes in several primate genera. The proposed genomic
arrangement for each genus is shown, with pseudogenes indicated by
ψ and *. The potential for
the species’ serum to lyse T. brucei is also
indicated (adapted from Smith and Malik, 2009).While there has been some controversy concerning the roles of these two proteins with
regards trypanosome lysis, the current consensus is that both proteins are necessary
for optimal lysis and that HPR and APOL1 have complementary roles (Vanhollebeke
et al.
2007; Widener et al.
2007). Although it has also been shown to
have some trypanosome-specific toxicity itself (Harrington et al.
2010), possibly due to the un-cleaved
signal peptide, which can affect membrane fluidity (Harrington et al.
2010), HPR acts primarily as a ligand.
Similar to its haptoglobin ancestor, HPR binds haemoglobin and thus facilitates
uptake of TLF-1 via a parasite haptoglobin-haemoglobin receptor (HpHbR)
(Vanhollebeke et al.
2008; Vanhollebeke and Pays, 2010). This strategy likely evolved to take
advantage of the fact that trypanosomes are haem auxotrophs (Korený
et al.
2010). After being endocytosed (Hager
et al.
1994), the TLF-1 particle is trafficked to
the lysosome where APOL1 is released. The hairpin structure of APOL1 is normally
configured closed at neutral pH, however, the low pH of the lysosome disperses the
salt bridges which stabilize the hairpin ‘hinge’, resulting in
a conformational change (Vanhollebeke and Pays, 2006). This reveals a membrane-addressing domain and the BH3
pore-forming domain (Vanhollebeke and Pays, 2006). With both of these domains exposed, APOL1 embeds in the lysosomal
membrane, forming anionic pores and thus perturbing the osmotic balance of the
organelle. This leads to lysis of the parasite, either by simple mechanical
disruption due to swelling of the organelle or the leakage of digestive enzymes into
the main cell body (Vanhamme et al.
2003; Pays et al.
2006; Vanhollebeke and Pays, 2010). As both HPR and APOL1 are found in
TLF-2, it is likely that the lysis method for this particle involves both of these
proteins, although the method of entry for TLF-2 only partially involves the HpHbR
receptor (Bullard et al.
2012). The mechanism by which the majority
of TLF-2 is bound and internalized by the parasite is currently unknown, but may
involve weak interactions between IgM and the VSG coat of the parasite or a second
receptor for TLF that has been described (Drain et al.
2001; Green et al.
2002; Vanhollebeke and Pays, 2010). The second trypanosome receptor for
TLF is unidentified but was first described from low temperature binding assays
showing TLF-1 is internalized by both a high-affinity low copy number receptor (now
known to be HpHbR) and a second low-affinity, high copy number receptor (Drain
et al.
2001). The putative second receptor was
further investigated using HDL competition, binding and uptake assays (Green
et al.
2002) and shown to act as a general
lipoprotein scavenger which binds multiple classes of lipoprotein, including HDL,
LDL, oxidized LDL and TLF.Primates have likely evolved this highly effective innate immunity based on APOL1
because trypanosomes have escaped the effects of the adaptive immune response due to
antigenic variation (Barry and McCulloch, 2001; Pays et al.
2001). Trypanosomes are covered in a highly
immunogenic, dense, variable surface glycoprotein coat, which is rapidly turned over
with the parasite membrane and frequently switched to a different VSG, rendering
antibody-based immunity ineffective. The high turnover of the parasite's
surface membrane requires a large amount of lipid, however, trypanosomes are lipid
auxotrophs and so obtain their lipids in the form of HDL from their host (Green
et al.
2002). The packaging of APOL1 into HDL
exploits the parasite's requirement for this essential nutrient to
deliver the highly toxic APOL1 molecule.Dating the emergence of trypanolytic APOL1 in primates is challenging as the APOL
gene cluster has undergone numerous expansion, duplication and loss events during
primate evolution (Fig. 1) (Smith and Malik,
2009), although it must precede the
time when the hominidae and cercopithecidae
primate lineages diverged as both possess lytic APOL1 (approximately 20 mya) (Seed
and Sechelski, 1990; Lugli et al.
2004). The addition of a secretory signal
peptide to APOL1 appears to be a unique key factor allowing its use as a protective
element against trypanosomes, as all other APOL proteins are intracellular
(Vanhollebeke and Pays, 2006). The signal
peptide appears to have originated due to a gain of function mutation after the
divergence of APOL1 and APOL2 (Smith and Malik, 2009). Although the APOL1 defensive strategy works successfully against
most species of African trypanosome, two human infective trypanosome sub-species
have evolved to counter the innate defence provided by primate APOL1. Interestingly,
both sub-species utilize a truncated VSG as an essential component of their
resistance mechanisms. As several other genes also derive from VSGs, including the
transferrin receptor ESAG6/ESAG7, it would appear that the huge VSG repertoire of
these parasites provides a powerful resource that can be utilized by trypanosomes to
quickly evolve to infect new hosts and overcome novel challenges (Jackson et
al.
2013).
TRYPANOSOMA B. RHODESIENSE RESISTANCE TO TLF AND APOL1
Work to elucidate how the human infective sub-species of T. brucei
overcame APOL1-mediated lysis initially focused on T. b.
rhodesiense. A defining characteristic of human serum resistance within
this sub-species is its variable phenotype. The serum resistance phenotype can vary
during animal passage, with individual passages exhibiting the phenotype to
differing degrees (Targett and Wilson, 1973; Willett and Fairbairn, 1955). It was
noted that the expression of the resistance phenotype closely correlates with
changes to the expressed VSG (van Meirvenne et al.
1976). This implicated an expression site
associated gene (ESAG) being responsible for resistance (Fig. 2) (Rifkin et al.
1994). Comparison of isogenic
serum-susceptible and serum-resistant T. b. rhodesiense lines
provided an invaluable research tool and by comparing mRNA, a
VSG-like gene transcript associated with resistance was identified
(De Greef et al.
1989; De Greef et al.
1992). Both resistant and sensitive
T. b. rhodesiense possess the serum resistance associated (SRA)
gene, but only resistant lines actively transcribe it. Conclusive proof that human
serum resistance in T. b. rhodesiense was due to this single gene
was shown when transgenic T. b. brucei expressing
SRA gained resistance to lysis by human serum (Xong et al.
1998). Anecdotally, this result was
solidified by accidental infection of a human with this T. b.
brucei–SRA strain (Gibson, 2005), demonstrating that the
SRA gene alone is sufficient to confer human serum resistance.
Fig. 2.
Human serum resistance of T. b. rhodesiense. (Upper)
Schematic diagram of a typical trypanosome expression site and the SRA
expression of T. b. rhodesiense (adapted from Gibson,
2005). (Lower) Diagram of
the typical domains of a VSG and the approximate
location of the 378 bp deletion in the SRA
gene (adapted from Campillo and Carrington, 2003).
Human serum resistance of T. b. rhodesiense. (Upper)
Schematic diagram of a typical trypanosome expression site and the SRA
expression of T. b. rhodesiense (adapted from Gibson,
2005). (Lower) Diagram of
the typical domains of a VSG and the approximate
location of the 378 bp deletion in the SRA
gene (adapted from Campillo and Carrington, 2003).SRA has been shown to be present in nearly all T. b.
rhodesiense lines (Gibson et al.
2002) although this is a circular argument,
i.e. the presence of SRA is diagnostic of T. b.
rhodesiense, so T. b. rhodesiense must always possess
SRA. Structurally, the SRA gene appears to be
a truncated VSG with a large deletion of a region in the centre of
the sequence encoding the N-terminal domain (De Greef et al.
1992; De Greef and Hamers, 1994; Xong et al.
1998). SRA is present on the cell surface
(Milner and Hajduk, 1999), where it is
internalized in the flagellar pocket during cell surface protein turnover, leading
to SRA presence in the endosomes and lysosome (Vanhamme et al.
2003; Oli et al.
2006; Shiflett et al.
2007). This is similar to the location of
APOL1 in the endosomal pathway before lysis. The deletion of 126 amino acids in SRA
removes two surface loops normally present in a VSG protein, exposing the internal
α-helices (Fig.
2) (Campillo and Carrington, 2003).
Based on modelled tertiary structure, it was proposed that the deletion resulted in
human serum resistance by allowing an inter-chelating interaction between the
exposed N-terminal helices of SRA and the
C-terminal helical section of APOL1 after the protein undergoes
conformational change in the acidic environment of the lysosome (Vanhamme et
al.
2003; Vanhamme and Pays, 2004).SRA is conserved at the nucleotide level in the T. b.
rhodesiense population, with less than 3% sequence variation
between strains (Gibson et al.
2002). The polymorphisms present in the
SRA gene, which can be differentiated by allele-specific PCR
(Gibson et al.
2002), divide T. b.
rhodesiense into two groups, ‘Northern’ and
‘Southern’, broadly along geographical lines (Gibson
et al.
2002; MacLean et al.
2004, Balmer et al.
2001). This geographical segregation of
SRA variants associates closely with the molecular and clinical
disease profiles that have also detected delineation between Northern and Southern
T. b. rhodesiense strains (Gibson et al.
1980; Hide et al.
1991; MacLeod et al.
2000; MacLean et al.
2004).The conservation of the SRA gene sequence combined with population
analyses, which have highlighted the close genetic relationship between sympatric
T. b. rhodesiense and T. b. brucei strains
(Hide et al.
1994; MacLeod et al.
2000), indicate that although the
formation of SRA is likely to have been the result of a single gene
recombination event (Campillo and Carrington, 2003), human infectivity has spread in East Africa by genetic exchange of
the SRA gene into genetically diverse T. b. brucei
backgrounds, thereby creating new strains of T. b. rhodesiense
(Gibson et al.
2002; Duffy et al.
2013). This potential for genetic exchange
between T. b. brucei and T. b. rhodesiense,
alongside the demonstration that expression of the SRA gene is all
that is necessary for human serum resistance (Xong et al.
1998) has implications for the evolution
of the disease, as the SRA gene may be transferred onto new genetic
backgrounds resulting in genotypes with altered pathogenicity.The discovery of SRA has led to advancements in diagnosis and
suggested preventative action to combat sleeping sickness caused by T. b.
rhodesiense. With the advent of specific PCR markers for
SRA, trypanosomes with the potential to infect humans can be
identified unambiguously without the need for laborious human serum resistance
assays such as the BIIT (Welburn et al.
2001; Gibson et al.
2002; Radwanska et al.
2002). By providing a robust and specific
single gene assay, requiring as little as a single parasite in starting material,
SRA-PCR has proved revolutionary in understanding the role of wildlife and livestock
in the epidemiology of the disease. For example, traditional microscopy techniques
and HSR assays estimated the number of domestic cattle carrying human infective
T. b. rhodesiense to be approximately 1%. PCR
analysis has indicated that instead this value is closer to 18% (Welburn
et al.
2001). Although the discovery of
SRA has been a major boon to the understanding of T. b.
rhodesiense genetics and biology, this gene is not present in the
dominant human infective trypanosome sub-species, T. b. gambiense.
Additionally, several strains have been described from T. b.
rhodesiense foci that are human serum resistant but for which the
SRA gene cannot be amplified by PCR (De Greef et
al. 1992; Enyaru et al.
2006). Whether this is due to divergent
SRA sequence in these strains or a novel resistance mechanism
is unknown.
TRYPANOSOMA B. GAMBIENSE RESISTANCE TO TLF AND APOL1
Investigating the human serum resistance phenotype of T. b.
gambiense has been hampered by the difficulty in working with the
sub-species in a laboratory setting. Trypanosoma b. gambiense
typically grows to very low parasitaemia and there have been immense difficulties in
adapting it to in vitro or in vivo models.
However, recent advances have allowed the generation of laboratory adapted lines and
successful transfections have now been achieved (Baltz et al.
2009; Capewell et al.
2013; Uzureau et al.
2013). It is now possible to unravel the
intricacies of the resistance phenotype of T. b. gambiense. An
important first step was the observation that T. b. gambiense does
not appear to internalize fluorescently tagged TLF-1 (Kieft et al.
2010; Capewell et al.
2011). This suggested that avoidance of
TLF-1 is a feature of human serum resistance in T. b. gambiense.
Several polymorphisms were identified in the HpHbR gene unique to
T. b. gambiense relative to other T. brucei
that affected TLF-1 uptake (Kieft et al.
2010). Subsequent research has confirmed
that a single polymorphism reduced the binding affinity of HpHbR for its ligand
20-fold (DeJesus et al.
2013; Higgins et al.
2013). This polymorphism appears to be
conserved across several T. b. gambiense foci (Symula et
al.
2012). Avoidance of TLF-1 therefore appears
to be a conserved trait in T. b. gambiense. Over-expression of a
functional T. b. bruceiHpHbR in T. b. gambiense
results in normal TLF-1 uptake and restricted growth (Capewell et al.
2013). Incubating wild-type T. b.
gambiense with serum containing high levels of TLF-1 also appears to
result in the serum resistance mechanism of T. b. gambiense
becoming overwhelmed (Uzureau et al.
2013). While the reduced expression and
activity of HpHbR provide a plausible explanation for how T. b.
gambiense avoids lysis by TLF-1, it does not explain how T. b.
gambiense is able to avoid uptake and consequent lysis by TLF-2. This
lytic particle is only partially internalized via HpHbR (Bullard et al.
2012). Additionally, T. b.
gambiense exposed to recombinant APOL1 internalized by non-specific fluid
phase endocytosis are still resistant despite observable uptake and trafficking of
the lytic protein to the lysosome (Capewell et al.
2011).In an effort to discover the factor that confers resistance to TLF-2 and APOL1, the
genomes of both T. b. brucei and T. b. gambiense
were interrogated (Berriman, 2005; Jackson
et al.
2010). To date, only one gene has been
found to be unique to T. b. gambiense, the gene encoding the
T. gambiense-specific glycoprotein (TgsGP) (Berberof et
al.
2001). This gene was found while attempting
to discover truncated VSGs similar to SRA in
T. b. gambiense. Unlike SRA, TgsGP is not
found in an expression site but is rather transcribed from a core chromosomal locus.
This region was formed by an inversion event that disrupted part of chromosome 2
that allowed an ordinarily silent region containing VSGs to be
transcribed (Fig. 3) (Berberof et
al.
2001; Felu et al.
2007). This inversion event is ancestral
and specific to T. b. gambiense (Felu et al.
2007). A VSG or
VSG pseudogene close to an AUT1 fragment cleaved by the
inversion has since evolved into the TgsGP gene.
TgsGP appears to be highly conserved across several T. b.
gambiense disease foci so is likely to have evolved only once (Gibson
et al.
2010). It differs from other VSGs in that
it does not possess the conserved VSG C-terminal domain and
possesses a GPI anchor related to that of ESAG6s (Fig. 3) (Felu et al.
2007). It is closely related to the
VSG Tb10.v4·0178, sharing more than 80%
genetic similarity, indicating a possible ancestral VSG (Gibson et al.
2010). Initially TgsGP was
thought unlikely to be involved in human serum resistance as ectopic expression of
the gene in T. b. brucei did not confer resistance (Berberof
et al.
2001). However, this does not take into
account other factors that may be present in T. b. gambiense and
absent in T. b. brucei that are necessary for TgsGP to function.
When the TgsGP gene was deleted from the genome of T. b.
gambiense, parasites became sensitive to both human serum and APOL1
(Capewell et al.
2013; Uzureau et al.
2013), although the parasites were still
resistant to TLF-1. Removal of the TgsGP gene from T. b.
gambiense parasites ectopically expressing a functional T. b.
brucei HpHbR resulted in the parasites becoming sensitive to TLF-1
(Capewell et al.
2013; Uzureau et al.
2013). How TgsGP confers resistance is
still unknown as there is no direct interaction between APOL1 and TgsGP despite both
being found in similar endosomal compartments (Uzureau et al.
2013). Serial modification and ectopic
expression of TgsGP indicated the presence of a specific
Β-sheet structure within the protein that is essential for TgsGP to
function. It was hypothesized that this Β-sheet structure interacts with
and strengthens the parasite's internal membranes to allow them to resist
the pore-forming activity of APOL1. Support for this hypothesis is based on the
observation that recombinant TgsGP and derived peptides integrate with artificial
lipid bilayers and can affect lateral flow of the parasite surface membrane (Uzureau
et al.
2013). This suggests that membrane fluidity
is different in T. b. gambiense (that contains TgsGP) compared with
T. b. brucei and suggests a causal relationship with the human
serum resistance phenotype. This is indeed a tempting hypothesis, although a direct
relationship between the observation and human infectivity has not been shown.
Recombinant TgsGP and related peptides have a negligible effect on human serum
resistance when incubated with T. b. brucei. This fact, coupled to
the observations that ectopic expression of TgsGP in T. b.
brucei does not confer resistance and that TgsGP
knockout T. b. gambiense still displays a markedly higher
resistance to human serum than other T. b. brucei, suggests other
factors may be present in T. b. gambiense that function in concert
with TgsGP (Berberof et al.
2001; Capewell et al.
2011; Uzureau et al.
2013).
Fig. 3.
Human serum resistance of T. b. gambiense. (Upper) Model
of the chromosomal inversion on chromosome 2 that allowed the silent
region containing the progenitor of TgsGP to be
constitutively transcribed and undergo selection. The inversion is
present on one homologue of chromosome 2 and is conserved across all
T. b. gambiense (adapted from Berberof et
al.
2001; Felu et al.
2007). (Lower) Diagram of the
typical domains of a VSG and the approximate location
of the C-terminal deletion in TgsGP (adapted from
(Gibson et al.
2010)).
Human serum resistance of T. b. gambiense. (Upper) Model
of the chromosomal inversion on chromosome 2 that allowed the silent
region containing the progenitor of TgsGP to be
constitutively transcribed and undergo selection. The inversion is
present on one homologue of chromosome 2 and is conserved across all
T. b. gambiense (adapted from Berberof et
al.
2001; Felu et al.
2007). (Lower) Diagram of the
typical domains of a VSG and the approximate location
of the C-terminal deletion in TgsGP (adapted from
(Gibson et al.
2010)).One possible candidate for involvement is the cysteine protease protein family. These
enzymes are heavily involved in degradation of host proteins, with several found in
the endosomal pathway and lysosome. It has been demonstrated that cysteine protease
inhibitors affect the ability of T. b. brucei to resist lysis by
human serum, perhaps by affecting degradation of the TLF particles or APOL1 itself
(Bishop et al.
2001). General inhibition of cysteine
peptidase in T. b. gambiense strains without TgsGP reduced their
capacity to resist human serum and APOL1 to a level approximately equivalent to
T. b. brucei (Uzureau et al.
2013). RNAi and knockouts of
ICP (inhibitor of cysteine peptidase) cause a general increase in
cysteine protease expression in T. b. brucei and also raise human
serum resistance, suggesting that these proteases could be a factor (Uzureau
et al.
2013). However, an experiment that
over-expresses cysteine proteases in a T. b. brucei with ectopic
TgsGP expression has not been undertaken. This would confirm if
high cysteine protease activity is indeed the missing factor necessary for TgsGP to
function in T. b. brucei. While higher expression of cysteine
proteases in T. b. gambiense may be the effector that leads to
greater human serum resistance, it was also noted that the pH of the endocytic
compartment of T. b. gambiense is slightly lower than that of
T. b. brucei (Uzureau et al.
2013). This may increase the degradation of
APOL1 and elicit a protective effect. Several T. brucei cysteine
proteases, particularly cathepsins, are more active at low pH (O'Brien
et al.
2008). Again, this hypothesis has not been
tested and is at present conjecture.Taken together, it would appear that the resistance mechanism of T. b.
gambiense involves several factors: (1) reduction of lytic particle
uptake by reducing expression and binding affinity of the HpHb receptor, (2)
expression of TgsGP possibly affecting membrane fluidity and
resistance to APOL1 disruption and (3) increased amounts of cysteine proteases that
aid degradation of APOL1.
EVOLVING PRIMATE RESISTANCE TO T. B. RHODESIENSE AND T.
B. GAMBIENSE
Although the mechanisms for how primates resist trypanosome infection and how some
trypanosomes have overcome this resistance are becoming clearer, the evolutionary
arms race between primates and trypanosomes continues. It is becoming apparent that
mechanisms to combat infection of both T. b. rhodesiense and
T. b. gambiense in primates have evolved and are continuing to
evolve. Although trypanolytic APOL1 evolved in the ancestors of
catarrhine primates, it appears to have diverged into two distinct
lineages that exhibit differing efficacies of trypanosome lysis. APOL1 from the
hominidae lineage (gorillas and humans) is effective against
most trypanosomes (Seed and Sechelski, 1990; Lugli et al.
2004), except T. b.
rhodesiense and T. b. gambiense while APOL1 from the
cercopithecidae lineage (baboons and macaques) is also able to
lyse T. b. rhodesiense (Seed and Sechelski, 1990; Kageruka et al.
1991; Thomson et al.
2009). Cercopithecidae
lineage APOL1 is able to lyse T. b. rhodesiense due to a
modification of the SRA interacting domain of APOL1 at the C-terminus of the protein
(Fig. 4), which disrupts SRA binding
after APOL1 has undergone conformational change (Lecordier et al.
2009; Thomson et al.
2009). Recombinant protein created by
deleting this domain from humanAPOL1 is also able to lyse T. b.
rhodesiense, suggesting that evolving a modification to this region of
APOL1 would render humans resistant to T. b. rhodesiense (Lecordier
et al.
2009). There is preliminary evidence that
this may have occurred with the identification of selection for two specific APOL1
alleles (G1 and G2) in African Americans with ancestry in sub-Saharan Africa
(Genovese et al.
2010). Both the G1 and G2 alleles of
APOL1 show modification of the SRA binding region (Fig. 4) and recombinant versions of these
alleles, particularly G2, are able to reduce the growth of T. b.
rhodesiense parasites in vitro (Genovese et al.
2010). However, presence of these alleles
also correlates with increased incidence of kidney disease, particularly in
individuals homozygous for either allele (Freedman et al.
2010; Genovese et al.
2010; Tzur et al.
2010). The maintenance of a trait that is
beneficial to heterozygotes but deleterious to homozygotes parallels the
well-described co-evolutionary interplay between sickle-cell anaemia and
Plasmodium (Williams et al.
2005). However, to date, no case-controlled
study using natural populations has been undertaken to test the hypothesis that
G1/G2 selection is due to pressure from trypanosomes. A study examining APOL1
selection across Africa found extremely low prevalence for G2, and G1 was only
present in a population not exposed to T. b. rhodesiense (Ko
et al.
2013). They did, however, find a much
higher number of non-synonymous mutations in the SRA binding domain of APOL1 than
would be expected by chance.
Fig. 4.
APOL1 variants. Several variants of APOL1 show differing lysis efficacy
against trypanosomes. Wild-type human APOL1 can lyse T.
congolense, T. vivax and T. b. brucei.
Baboon APOL1 possesses two consecutive lysines rather than asparagines
in the SRA-interacting domain of APOL1 (black lines). This reduces the
binding affinity of SRA to APOL1, allowing the baboon protein to lyse
T. b. rhodesiense. G1/G2 human alleles are under
selection in populations of African descent and also possess
modifications to the SRA-interacting domain of APOL1 (black lines, white
box). Like baboon APOL1, these alleles demonstrate efficacy against
T. b. rhodesiense. The G3 allele is under selection
in populations exposed to T. b. gambiense but efficacy
of this allele against trypanosome sub-species has not been assessed.
Unlike G1/G2, G3 mutations lie within the pore-forming and
membrane-addressing domains of APOL1 (black lines).
APOL1 variants. Several variants of APOL1 show differing lysis efficacy
against trypanosomes. Wild-type humanAPOL1 can lyse T.
congolense, T. vivax and T. b. brucei.
BaboonAPOL1 possesses two consecutive lysines rather than asparagines
in the SRA-interacting domain of APOL1 (black lines). This reduces the
binding affinity of SRA to APOL1, allowing the baboon protein to lyse
T. b. rhodesiense. G1/G2 human alleles are under
selection in populations of African descent and also possess
modifications to the SRA-interacting domain of APOL1 (black lines, white
box). Like baboonAPOL1, these alleles demonstrate efficacy against
T. b. rhodesiense. The G3 allele is under selection
in populations exposed to T. b. gambiense but efficacy
of this allele against trypanosome sub-species has not been assessed.
Unlike G1/G2, G3 mutations lie within the pore-forming and
membrane-addressing domains of APOL1 (black lines).While less well studied than T. b. rhodesiense, it is also possible
that there are primates or human populations that have evolved APOL1 alleles that
protect against T. b. gambiense. The Bambuti people of the Mbomo
region in the Democratic Republic of the Congo have long been believed to be less
susceptible to African sleeping sickness (Frezil, 1983), although no controlled study has been performed to test this
assumption or investigate their APOL1 alleles. It is also becoming increasingly
apparent that infection by T. b. gambiense is not always fatal with
the recent identification of asymptomatic and self-cure cases from Côte
d'Ivoire (Ilboudo et al.
2012; Jamonneau et al.
2012). The APOL1 sequences from these
individuals have not been assessed, although a recent study assessing APOL1
selection across Africa has identified an allele termed G3 that is under selection
in the Fulani people of Cameroon, a region affected by T. b.
gambiense African sleeping sickness (Ko et al.
2013). This particular allele differs from
the G1/G2 variants that have a mutation in the SRA interacting domain and instead
possesses a mutation in the membrane-addressing domain of APOL1 (Fig. 4). It is, as yet, unknown if this
variant is protective against T. b. gambiense. Looking outside
human populations and to the Cercopithecidae lineage of APOL1, the
baboon species Papio papio appears to only be transiently infected
by T. b. gambiense. This species range overlaps with that of
T. b. gambiense, while the ranges of other
Papio species that are not resistant to the disease do not overlap
(Kageruka et al.
1991; Lecordier et al.
2009; Thomson et al.
2009). It is possible that this species of
baboon has evolved an APOL1 variant that is able to lyse T. b.
gambiense due to exposure to the disease. Finally, while the majority of
effort has primarily concentrated on finding APOL1 variants toxic to human infective
trypanosomes, other proteins may also contribute. For example, specific alleles of
IL-6 and IL-10 have been associated with resistance to T. b.
gambiense in humans (Courtin et al.
2006, 2007; Garcia et al.
2006). A recent study has also reported
evidence that alleles containing a duplication of the parasite receptor ligand,
HPR, are present at high frequency in Central and West African
populations endemic to T. b. gambiense, relative to the global
distribution. However, whether such duplication offers any protective effect against
T. b. gambiensesleeping sickness has not yet been
experimentally tested (Hardwick et al.
2014). There was no significant link
between HPR duplication and the presentation of sleeping sickness
in children in affected areas, although this may be due to the low power of the
study. To discover other possible factors involved in genetic susceptibility to
African sleeping sickness, large-scale genome-wide association studies should be
undertaken.
DISCUSSION AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
The co-evolutionary arms race between trypanosomes and primates is a fascinating case
study in parasite and host interactions. As the mammalian adaptive immune system is
rendered ineffective by the trypanosomes’ antigenic variation strategy,
primates have evolved specific countermeasures to target trypanosomes utilizing the
trypanolytic protein APOL1 bound to HDL (Summary: Fig. 5). By evolving a trypanolytic HDL, primates were able to exploit
both the trypanosomes’ high lipid requirement necessary for fast turnover
of the VSG coat to maintain antigenic variation and the lack of a haem production
pathway in the parasite. However, two sub-species of T. brucei have
evolved their own counters to overcome lysis by human serum and APOL1. Both
resistance mechanisms appear to utilize a truncated VSG as an
essential component, SRA in T. b. rhodesiense and
TgsGP in T. b. gambiense. This highlights the
evolutionary potential that the huge VSG repertoire provides this parasite. Although
not covered during this review, there are also two other potential serum resistance
mechanisms in T. brucei that do not utilize SRA or TgsGP. In East
sub-Saharan Africa, a small number of human infective trypanosomes have been
identified from T. b rhodesiense foci that do not possess the
SRA gene (De Greef et al.
1989; Rifkin et al.
1994; Enyaru et al.
2006). In Western sub-Saharan Africa,
sympatric with T. b gambiense, a further group of human infective
trypanosomes has been identified. These are termed group 2 T. b.
gambiense as they do not fit into the classical genetic profiles associated
with the much more prevalent group 1 T. b. gambiense (Gibson, 1986). Unlike group 1, group 2 T. b.
gambiense do not possess TgsGP and the resistance
mechanism is variably expressed in a manner reminiscent of T. b.
rhodesiense. The resistance mechanism does not appear to correlate with
changes in expression site, however (Capewell et al.
2011). How non-SRA T. b.
rhodesiense and group 2 T. b. gambiense are able to
overcome APOL1 remains unclear, although it highlights the high potential for
T. brucei to quickly evolve to infect new hosts and overcome
innate immunity.
Fig. 5.
Summary of the co-evolutionary arms race between African trypanosomes and
the primate host. Humans are protected from infection from the majority
of Africa trypanosome species by two serum trypanolytic factors, TLF-1
and TLF-2, which exploit parasite nutrient scavenging pathways to take
up and deliver lytic APOL1 protein to the lysosome. A conformational
change in the low pH environment of the lysosome releases APOL1 and
exposes domains that allow it to form anionic pores in the membrane,
leading to osmotic imbalance and cell lysis. Two sub-species of
T. brucei have evolved specific mechanisms to
overcome this innate resistance. In T. b. rhodesiense,
expression of the SRA gene, a truncated VSG, confers
resistance to lysis by both TLF-1 and 2. Deletion of the VSG surface
loops results, ultimately, in its trafficking through the endocytic
pathway, where it is able to bind APOL1 and prevent pore-forming
activity in the lysosome. In contrast, T. b. gambiense
has evolved a complex, multi-component mechanism of HSR involving
reduction in the binding affinity of TbgHpHbR for
TLF-1, the expression of a T. b. gambiense specific
truncated VSG (TgsGP) which conceivably increases
resistance of the lysosomal membrane to APOL1 disruption and enhanced
expression or activity of cysteine proteases (CP) that aid degradation
of APOL1 within the endocytic pathway. Recently, the discovery of
certain APOL1 variants has suggested the evolution of counter measures
to at least one of these resistance mechanisms. APOL1 from a subset of
primates of the cercopithecidae lineage are naturally
resistant to T. b. rhodesiense but not T. b.
gambiense infection as a result of mutations in the SRA
interacting domain that impair SRA binding and restore APOL1 activity.
In an example of convergent evolution, two haplotypes displaying similar
mutations, termed G1 and G2, have been identified in a number of human
populations of African origin.
Summary of the co-evolutionary arms race between African trypanosomes and
the primate host. Humans are protected from infection from the majority
of Africa trypanosome species by two serum trypanolytic factors, TLF-1
and TLF-2, which exploit parasite nutrient scavenging pathways to take
up and deliver lytic APOL1 protein to the lysosome. A conformational
change in the low pH environment of the lysosome releases APOL1 and
exposes domains that allow it to form anionic pores in the membrane,
leading to osmotic imbalance and cell lysis. Two sub-species of
T. brucei have evolved specific mechanisms to
overcome this innate resistance. In T. b. rhodesiense,
expression of the SRA gene, a truncated VSG, confers
resistance to lysis by both TLF-1 and 2. Deletion of the VSG surface
loops results, ultimately, in its trafficking through the endocytic
pathway, where it is able to bind APOL1 and prevent pore-forming
activity in the lysosome. In contrast, T. b. gambiense
has evolved a complex, multi-component mechanism of HSR involving
reduction in the binding affinity of TbgHpHbR for
TLF-1, the expression of a T. b. gambiense specific
truncated VSG (TgsGP) which conceivably increases
resistance of the lysosomal membrane to APOL1 disruption and enhanced
expression or activity of cysteine proteases (CP) that aid degradation
of APOL1 within the endocytic pathway. Recently, the discovery of
certain APOL1 variants has suggested the evolution of counter measures
to at least one of these resistance mechanisms. APOL1 from a subset of
primates of the cercopithecidae lineage are naturally
resistant to T. b. rhodesiense but not T. b.
gambienseinfection as a result of mutations in the SRA
interacting domain that impair SRA binding and restore APOL1 activity.
In an example of convergent evolution, two haplotypes displaying similar
mutations, termed G1 and G2, have been identified in a number of human
populations of African origin.It is becoming apparent that the evolutionary arms race between primates and
T. brucei is continuing, with several human and primate
populations displaying resistance to both T. b. rhodesiense and
T. b gambiense. Understanding the complex co-evolution that has
occurred between trypanosomes and primates may lead to prospective disease
interventions. For example, inhibitors or antibodies that target the essential
proteins involved in each sub-species’ resistance mechanism (SRA and
TgsGP) would render these parasites susceptible to normal innate resistance and
APOL1. An alternative approach is to identify APOL1 variants or other genes present
in trypanosome-resistant human and primate populations that may serve as a universal
therapy for all African trypanosomes. Once identified, these APOL1 variants must be
targeted to trypanosomes as APOL1 uptake when not bound to a facilitating ligand is
slow and inefficient (Vanhamme et al.
2003; Baral et al.
2006). One proposed solution involves the
distribution of transgenic cows across Africa that express either recombinant baboonAPOL1 (Thomson et al.
2009) or truncated humanAPOL1 (Lecordier
et al.
2009). Mice models expressing these genes
ectopically are unable to be infected by either T. b. brucei or
T. b. rhodesiense, if expressed in concert with HPR and APOA1
(Thomson et al.
2009). An alternative proposed delivery
mechanism is the conjugation of variant APOL1 to antibody fragments that target
conserved motifs on parasite VSGs (Baral et al.
2006). A caveat to these proposed
interventions is that the APOL1 variant used by each is not lytic to the most
prevalent human infective trypanosome, T. b. gambiense (Lecordier
et al.
2009; Thomson et al.
2009). It is possible that usage of such
APOL1 variants would select for increased incidence of human disease by eradicating
the competitor species such as Trypanosoma congolense, Trypanosoma
vivax or Trypanosoma brucei. Nevertheless, it is clear
that understanding the co-evolution of primates and African trypanosomes is a
powerful tool in combating humantrypanosomiasis.
Authors: Luc Vanhamme; Françoise Paturiaux-Hanocq; Philippe Poelvoorde; Derek P Nolan; Laurence Lins; Jan Van Den Abbeele; Annette Pays; Patricia Tebabi; Huang Van Xong; Alain Jacquet; Nicole Moguilevsky; Marc Dieu; John P Kane; Patrick De Baetselier; Robert Brasseur; Etienne Pays Journal: Nature Date: 2003-03-06 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Barry I Freedman; Jeffrey B Kopp; Carl D Langefeld; Giulio Genovese; David J Friedman; George W Nelson; Cheryl A Winkler; Donald W Bowden; Martin R Pollak Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2010-08-05 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: John M Harrington; Justin Widener; Natalie Stephens; Thomas Johnson; Maria Francia; Paul Capewell; Annette Macleod; Stephen L Hajduk Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2010-07-08 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Andrew P Jackson; Mandy Sanders; Andrew Berry; Jacqueline McQuillan; Martin A Aslett; Michael A Quail; Bridget Chukualim; Paul Capewell; Annette MacLeod; Sara E Melville; Wendy Gibson; J David Barry; Matthew Berriman; Christiane Hertz-Fowler Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis Date: 2010-04-13
Authors: Patrick D Dummer; Sophie Limou; Avi Z Rosenberg; Jurgen Heymann; George Nelson; Cheryl A Winkler; Jeffrey B Kopp Journal: Semin Nephrol Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 5.299
Authors: Sylvain Biéler; Harald Waltenberger; Michael P Barrett; Richard McCulloch; Jeremy C Mottram; Mark Carrington; Wilhelm Schwaeble; James McKerrow; Margaret A Phillips; Paul A Michels; Philippe Büscher; Jean-Charles Sanchez; Richard Bishop; Derrick R Robinson; James Bangs; Michael Ferguson; Barbara Nerima; Audrey Albertini; Gerd Michel; Magdalena Radwandska; Joseph Mathu Ndung'u Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-12-09 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Daniil Nikitin; Dmitry Penzar; Andrew Garazha; Maxim Sorokin; Victor Tkachev; Nicolas Borisov; Alexander Poltorak; Vladimir Prassolov; Anton A Buzdin Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2018-01-30 Impact factor: 7.561
Authors: Andrew P Jackson; Sophie Goyard; Dong Xia; Bernardo J Foth; Mandy Sanders; Jonathan M Wastling; Paola Minoprio; Matthew Berriman Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis Date: 2015-08-12