Literature DB >> 29113824

Comparative analysis of different cell systems for Zika virus (ZIKV) propagation and evaluation of anti-ZIKV compounds in vitro.

Ilaria Vicenti1, Adele Boccuto2, Alessia Giannini2, Filippo Dragoni2, Francesco Saladini2, Maurizio Zazzi2.   

Abstract

A strong correlation between Zika virus (ZIKV) infection and severe neurological disease in newborns and occasionally adults has emerged in the Brazilian outbreak. Efficient human cell-based assays are required to test candidate inhibitors of ZIKV replication. The aim of this work was to investigate ZIKV propagation and quantification in different cell lines. The human (U87, A549, Huh7), mosquito (C6/36) and monkey (VERO E6) cell lines tested were all permissive to ZIKV infection. When assessed by plaque forming units (PFU) in three different target cell lines, the maximal production of ZIKV was achieved in Huh7 at day 3 post-infection (6.38±0.44 log10PFU/ml). The C6/36 cell line showed a low and slow production of virus when compared with other cell lines. A549 readout cells generated a larger number of plaques compared to Huh7 but not to VERO E6 cells. ZIKV PFU and RNA titers showed the highest correlation when Huh7 and A549 were used as the producer and readout cells, respectively. Also, U87 cells produced ZIKV RNA titers which were highly correlated with PFU independently from the readout cell line. Using the best virus-cell system, sofosbuvir and ribavirin EC50 were 1.2μM and 1.1μM when measured through plaque assay, and 4.2μM and 5.2μM when measured by quantitative real time PCR (qRT-PCR), respectively. In summary, ZIKV can efficiently infect different human cell lines and rapidly reach peak viral titers. Overall, A549 cells appear to be as efficient as the VERO E6 gold standard for plaque assay allowing the use of human, rather than simian, cells for evaluating candidate anti-ZIKV compounds by the reference assay. The possibility to replace the labor-intensive plaque assay with the more rapid and easy-to-perform qRT-PCR is appealing and warrants further investigation.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Plaque assay; Sofosbuvir; Viral replication kinetics; Yield reduction assay; Zika virus; qRT-PCR

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29113824     DOI: 10.1016/j.virusres.2017.11.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Virus Res        ISSN: 0168-1702            Impact factor:   3.303


  21 in total

1.  [A non-coated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for screening zika virus envelope protein].

Authors:  Hongmiao Liu; Weifeng Zhou; Hui Liao; Zhengyang Hu; Min Zou; Shuwen Liu
Journal:  Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao       Date:  2019-06-30

2.  Infection by Zika viruses requires the transmembrane protein AXL, endocytosis and low pH.

Authors:  Mirjana Persaud; Alicia Martinez-Lopez; Cindy Buffone; Steven A Porcelli; Felipe Diaz-Griffero
Journal:  Virology       Date:  2018-03-22       Impact factor: 3.616

3.  Adaptation to host cell environment during experimental evolution of Zika virus.

Authors:  Emilie Hardy; Kassian Kobert; Soheil Rastgou Talemi; Vincent Grass; Elodie Décembre; Coralie Guy; Peter V Markov; Alain Kohl; Mathilde Paris; Anja Böckmann; Sara Muñoz-González; Lee Sherry; Thomas Höfer; Bastien Boussau; Marlène Dreux
Journal:  Commun Biol       Date:  2022-10-21

4.  Beyond Members of the Flaviviridae Family, Sofosbuvir Also Inhibits Chikungunya Virus Replication.

Authors:  André C Ferreira; Patrícia A Reis; Caroline S de Freitas; Carolina Q Sacramento; Lucas Villas Bôas Hoelz; Mônica M Bastos; Mayara Mattos; Natasha Rocha; Isaclaudia Gomes de Azevedo Quintanilha; Carolina da Silva Gouveia Pedrosa; Leticia Rocha Quintino Souza; Erick Correia Loiola; Pablo Trindade; Yasmine Rangel Vieira; Giselle Barbosa-Lima; Hugo C de Castro Faria Neto; Nubia Boechat; Stevens K Rehen; Karin Brüning; Fernando A Bozza; Patrícia T Bozza; Thiago Moreno L Souza
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  Development of a novel peptide aptamer-based immunoassay to detect Zika virus in serum and urine.

Authors:  Do Thi Hoang Kim; Duong Tuan Bao; Hyun Park; Nguyen Minh Ngoc; Seon-Ju Yeo
Journal:  Theranostics       Date:  2018-06-07       Impact factor: 11.556

6.  Zika virus replication and cytopathic effects in liver cells.

Authors:  Kenneth E Sherman; Susan D Rouster; Ling X Kong; Matthew T Aliota; Jason T Blackard; Gary E Dean
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-03-20       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Route of Infection Influences Zika Virus Shedding in a Guinea Pig Model.

Authors:  Ashley E Saver; Stephanie A Crawford; Jonathan D Joyce; Andrea S Bertke
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 6.600

8.  Harringtonine Inhibits Zika Virus Infection through Multiple Mechanisms.

Authors:  Zheng-Zong Lai; Yi-Jung Ho; Jeng-Wei Lu
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2020-09-07       Impact factor: 4.411

9.  Replication Variance of African and Asian Lineage Zika Virus Strains in Different Cell Lines, Mosquitoes and Mice.

Authors:  Tey Putita Ou; Heidi Auerswald; Saraden In; Borin Peng; Senglong Pang; Sébastien Boyer; Rithy Choeung; Myrielle Dupont-Rouzeyrol; Philippe Dussart; Veasna Duong
Journal:  Microorganisms       Date:  2021-06-09

10.  Comparative characterization of flavivirus production in two cell lines: Human hepatoma-derived Huh7.5.1-8 and African green monkey kidney-derived Vero.

Authors:  Kyoko Saito; Masayoshi Fukasawa; Yoshitaka Shirasago; Ryosuke Suzuki; Naoki Osada; Toshiyuki Yamaji; Takaji Wakita; Eiji Konishi; Kentaro Hanada
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-24       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.