STRATEGIES FOR PREVENTION AND TREATMENT OF HEPATITIS C VIRUS INFECTION

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is the causative agent of Hepatitis C, a serious global health problem which results in liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Currently there is no effective treatment or vaccine against the virus. Therefore, development of a therapeutic vaccine is of paramount importance. In this project, three alternative approaches were used to control HCV including a DNA vaccine, a recombinant viral vaccine and RNA interference. The first approach was to test the effect of different promoters on the efficacy of a DNA vaccine against HCV. Plasmids encoding HCV-NS3 and E1 antigens were designed under three different promoters, adenoviral E1A, MLP, and CMV ie. The promoter effect on the antigen expression in 293 cells, as well as on the antibody level in immunized BALB/c mice, was evaluated. The results showed that the antigens were successfully expressed from all vectors. The CMV ie promoter induced the highest antigen expression and the highest antibody level. Second, the efficiency of a recombinant adenovirus vaccine encoding HCV-NS3 was compared to that of a HCV-NS3 plasmid vaccine. The results showed that the recombinant adenovirus vaccine induced higher antibody levels as compared to the plasmid vaccine. The relationship between the immune response and miRNA was also evaluated. The levels of mir-181, mir-155, mir-21 and mir-296 were quantified in the sera of immunized animals. mir-181 and mir-21 were found to be upregulated in animals injected with adenoviral vectors. Third, two recombinant adenoviruses encoding siRNAs targeting both the helicase and protease parts of the NS3 region were tested for their ability to inhibit NS3 expression. The results showed that the siRNA against protease was more effective in silencing the HCV-NS3 gene in a HCV replicon cell line. This result confirmed the efficiency of adenovirus for siRNA delivery. These results confirmed that CMV ie is optimum promoter for immune response induction. Adenovirus was shown to be an effective delivery vector for antigens or siRNAs. In addition, miRNAs were proved to be involved in the regulation of immune response.

Novel glutathione disulfide transferase function of CC-glutaredoxins involved in disease resistance and flower development

Glutaredoxins are oxidoreductases capable of reducing protein disulfide bridges and glutathione mixed disulfides through the process of deglutathionylation and glutathionylation. Lately, redox-mediated modifications of functional cysteine residues of TGA1 and TGA8 transcription factors have been postulated. Namely, GRX480 and ROXY1 glutaredoxins have been previously shown to interact with TGA proteins and have been suggested to regulate redox state of these proteins. TGA1, together with TGA2, is involved in systemic acquired resistance (SAR) establishment in the plant Arabidopsis thaliana through PR1 (Pathogenesis related 1) gene activation. They both form an enhanceosome complex with the NPR1 protein (non-expressor of pathogenesis related gene 1) which leads to PR1 transcription. Although TGA1 is capable of activating PR1 transcription, the ability of the TGA1 NPR1 enhanceosome complex to assembly is based on the redox status of TGA1. We identified GRX480 as a glutathionylating enzyme that catalyzes the TGA1 glutathione disulfide transferase reaction with a Km of around 20μM GSSG (oxidized glutathione). Out of four cysteine residues found within TGA1, C172 and C266 were found to be glutathionylated by this enzyme. We also confirmed TGA1 glutathionylation in vivo and showed that this modification takes place while TGA1 is associated with the PR1 promoter enzymatically via GRX480. Furthermore, we show that glutathionylation via GRX480 abolishes TGA1's interaction with NPR1 and consequently prevents the TGA1-NPR1 transcription activation of PR1. When glutathionylated, TGA1 is recruited to the PR1 promoter and acts as a repressor. Therefore, glutathionylation is a mechanism that prevents TGA1 NPR1 interaction, allowing TGA1 to function as a repressor of PR1 transcription. Surprisingly, GRX480 was not able to deglutathionylate proteins demonstrating the irreversible nature of the reaction. Moreover, we demonstrate that other members of CC-class glutaredoxins, namely ROXY1 and ROXY2, can also catalyze protein glutathionylation. The TGA8 protein was previously shown to interact with NPR1 analogs, BOP1 and BOP2 proteins. However, unlike the case of TGA1 NPR1 interaction, here we demonstrate that TGA8-BOP1 interaction is not redox regulated and that TGA8 glutathionylation by ROXY1 and ROXY2 enzymes does not abolish this interaction in vitro. However, TGA8 glutathionylation results in TGA8 oligomer disassembly into smaller complexes and monomers. Our results suggest that CC-Grxs are unable to reduce mixed disulfides, instead they efficiently catalyze the opposite reaction which distinguishes them from traditional glutaredoxins. Therefore, they should not be classified as glutaredoxins but as protein glutathione disulfide transferases.