| Literature DB >> 31550241 |
Beatriz Escudero-Pérez1,2, Paula Ruibal1, Monika Rottstegge1,2, Anja Lüdtke1, Julia R Port1,2, Kristin Hartmann3, Sergio Gómez-Medina1,2, Jürgen Müller-Guhl1,4, Emily V Nelson1,2, Susanne Krasemann3, Estefanía Rodríguez4, César Muñoz-Fontela1,2.
Abstract
Filoviruses of the genus Ebolavirus include 6 species with marked differences in their ability to cause disease in humans. From the highly virulent Ebola virus to the seemingly nonpathogenic Reston virus, case fatality rates can range between 0% and 90%. In order to understand the molecular basis of these differences, it is imperative to establish disease models that recapitulate human disease as faithfully as possible. Nonhuman primates (NHPs) are the gold-standard models for filovirus pathogenesis, but comparative studies are skewed by the fact that Reston virus infection can be lethal for NHPs. Here we used HLA-A2-transgenic, NOD-scid-IL-2γ receptor-knockout (NSG-A2) mice reconstituted with human hematopoiesis to compare Ebola virus and Reston virus pathogenesis in a human-like environment. While markedly less pathogenic than Ebola virus, Reston virus killed 20% of infected mice, a finding that was linked to exacerbated inflammation and viral replication in the liver. In addition, the case fatality ratios of different Ebolavirus species in humans were recapitulated in the humanized mice. Our findings point to humanized mice as a putative model to test the pathogenicity of newly discovered filoviruses, and suggest that further investigations on Reston virus pathogenesis in humans are warranted.Entities:
Keywords: Infectious disease; Mouse models; Virology
Year: 2019 PMID: 31550241 PMCID: PMC6948759 DOI: 10.1172/jci.insight.126070
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JCI Insight ISSN: 2379-3708
Figure 1Mucosal exposure of huNSG-A2 mice to EBOV and RESTV.
(A) Flow cytometry–based evaluation of the presence of mature human immune cells in skin (lower back area) and lung of huNSG-A2 mice. Gates indicate the percentage of cells expressing human CD45 (h-CD45) in either organ. The gating strategy in the right panels shows the presence of human antigen-presenting cells (APCs) (G1), B cells (G2), CD14+ monocytes (G3), CD16+ monocytes (G4), nonmonocytic APCs (G5), and human DC subsets (G6–G8). (B) Histopathological analysis of huNSG-A2 lung tissue after infection with EBOV or RESTV on the indicated days after infection. White arrowheads indicate the presence of infected cells, showing EBOV NP– and CD45-positive staining. Scale bar: 50 μm (C) Histopathology score (ordinal method, values of 0 to 5) assessing the levels of hCD45 staining in n = 3 lung sections of RESTV- and EBOV-infected and control (Mock) mice. Box-and-whisker plots represent minimum to maximum values. All scoring values are shown.
Figure 2Comparative ebolavirus pathogenesis in huNSG-A2 mice.
(A) Kaplan-Meier survival curves of infected mice. Mice were infected intranasally with 1000 FFU EBOV (n = 14), RESTV (n = 15), TAFV (n = 11), BDBV (n = 7), and SUDV (n = 7). Mock-infected mice (n = 11) received 20 μL PBS. Log-rank (Mantel-Cox) analysis indicated statistically significant differences between results for EBOV- and SUDV-infected mice and those for all the other groups (P < 0.0001). (B) Weight loss of infected huNSG-A2 mice. Nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis analysis followed by Dunn’s post hoc test analysis indicated significant differences between results for mice infected with EBOV (P = 0.025) and SUDV (P = 0.017) and those for the other groups. (C) Kinetics of viremia in surviving and nonsurviving mice from infection to experimental endpoint. Dotted lines represent the limit of detection of 50 FFU/mL. (D) Levels of AST in blood of infected mice (survivors and nonsurvivors). In the survivor group,the mock treatment group is represented by the black dashed line. (E) Survival curve of huNSG-A2 mice infected with the EBOV variants Mayinga (n = 8) and Makona (n = 7). Log-rank (Mantel-Cox) analysis indicated statistical significance (P = 0.042). (F) Kinetics of viremia from infection to experimental endpoint. Dotted lines represent the limit of detection of 50 FFU/mL. Throughout the figure, error bars represent mean ± SEM.
Figure 3Inflammatory profile of mice infected with EBOV (Mayinga variant) and RESTV.
Heatmap showing levels of the indicated analytes in plasma of mice infected with either EBOV (Z, n = 7) or RESTV (R-D, dead; R-S, survivor; n = 4) on day 3 after infection. Hierarchical clustering of samples was performed based on euclidean distance using complete linkage. Cytokine data collected via Luminex multiplexed ELISA assays were normalized using min-max normalization, which normalized cytokine values between 1 and 0. Mock-infected mice (M) that received PBS are shown as controls. Visualization of cytokine profiles was performed using the R function heatmap.2 implementing euclidean distance and using ward.D clustering.
Individual pathogenesis data of all mice included in the heatmap analysis in Figure 3
Figure 4Liver pathology of EBOV- and RESTV-infected mice.
(A) Histopathological findings in tissue sections of huNSG-A2 mice infected with EBOV and RESTV. In lethally infected mice, pathological assessment was done at the time of death (necropsy); surviving mice were euthanized on day 30 after infection. Red indicates staining of EBOV and RESTV NP in the indicated tissues. (B) Histopathological score (ordinal method, values of 0 to 5) for human CD20- and Iba1-positive cells in liver sections of mock-infected (n = 3), RESTV-infected/surviving (S) (n = 2), lethally RESTV-infected (D) (n = 2), and EBOV-infected (n = 7) mice. Box-and-whisker plots represent minimum to maximum values. All scoring values are shown. (C) Histopathological analysis of liver sections subjected to immunohistochemistry staining with anti-NP (red), anti-Iba1 (brown) and anti–caspase-3 (Casp 3; brown) antibodies. The magnified image inside the square shows an infected macrophage surrounded by Iba1+ cells. Scale bars: 50 μm. Mock-infected mice received 20 μL PBS.