| Literature DB >> 32110999 |
Claudia Claus1, Matthias Jung2, Judith M Hübschen3.
Abstract
The rubella virus (RV) was the first virus shown to be teratogenic in humans. The wealth of data on the clinical symptoms associated with congenital rubella syndrome is in stark contrast to an incomplete understanding of the forces leading to the teratogenic alterations in humans. This applies not only to RV, but also to congenital viral infections in general and includes (1) the mode of vertical transmission, even at early gestation, (2) the possible involvement of inflammation as a consequence of an activated innate immune response, and (3) the underlying molecular and cellular alterations. With the progress made in the development of pluripotent stem cell-based models including organoids and embryoids, it is now possible to assess congenital virus infections on a mechanistic level. Moreover, antiviral treatment options can be validated, and newly emerging viruses with a potential impact on human embryonal development, such as that recently reflected by the Zika virus (ZIKV), can be characterized. Here, we discuss human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) and ZIKV in comparison to RV as viruses with well-known congenital pathologies and highlight their analysis on current models for the early phase of human development. This includes the implications of their genetic variability and, as such, virus strain-specific properties for their use as archetype models for congenital virus infections. In this review, we will discuss the use of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) and derived organoid systems for the study of congenital virus infections with a focus on their prominent aetiologies, HCMV, ZIKV, and RV. Their assessment on these models will provide valuable information on how human development is impaired by virus infections; it will also add new insights into the normal progression of human development through the analysis of developmental pathways in the context of virus-induced alterations. These are exciting perspectives for both developmental biology and congenital virology.Entities:
Keywords: Zika virus; blastocyst; congenital virus infection; cytomegalovirus; embryonal development; iPSC; interferon; organoid; placenta; pluripotent stem cells; rubella virus; teratogenesis
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32110999 PMCID: PMC7140399 DOI: 10.3390/cells9030542
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cells ISSN: 2073-4409 Impact factor: 6.600
Figure 1Timeline of congenital defects from maternal rubella virus (RV) infection in relation to embryonal stages. (A) The timeline of maternal RV infection with a high rate of congenital defects is given in direct comparison to first trimester embryonal development. The timeline refers to gestational age and starts from the first day of the last menstrual period. Highlighted is the blastocyst, which is composed of the embryoblast as the inner cell mass and the trophectoderm or trophoblast as its outer cell layer. (B) The inner cell mass of the blastocyst, the so-called embryoblast, transforms into a double layer, the hypoblast and epiblast. The hypoblast or primitive endoderm develops into the fluid-filled amniotic cavity, which later harbors the embryo. The epiblast gives rise to the embryo, which results in formation of the embryonic disc. The implantation of the blastocyst is followed by infiltration with maternal immune cells, which could potentially provide access of RV to the embryo. The question mark indicates this hypothesized mode of viral transfer. As a reference for (A) and (B), please refer to the main text, especially for the time line of congenital rubella infection in relation to gestational age to [11,14]. The timeline for teratogenic RV infection in relation to appearance of the rash in the mother is given in [12].
Figure 2Illustrative summary of current models available for the study of congenital virus infections. (A) Contrasting juxtaposition of the respective advantages and disadvantages of in vitro and vivo models for human development. (B) Timeline for the very early steps of human embryonal development that are addressable by undifferentiated and differentiating pluripotent stem cells as representatively illustrated by WISCi004-B iPSCs. Timeline is given in embryonal days as compared to gestational age in Figure 1A. As a reference, the reader is referred to the main manuscript text.