Methods to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of RNA molecules targeting post-integration steps of the HIV-1 replication cycle are described. These methods are useful for screening new molecules and optimizing the format of existing ones.
Small RNA therapies targeting post-integration steps in the HIV-1 replication cycle are among the top candidates for gene therapy and have the potential to be used as drug therapies for HIV-1 infection. Post-integration inhibitors include ribozymes, short hairpin (sh) RNAs, small interfering (si) RNAs, U1 interference (U1i) RNAs and RNA aptamers. Many of these have been identified using transient co-transfection assays with an HIV-1 expression plasmid and some have advanced to clinical trials. In addition to measures of efficacy, small RNAs have been evaluated for their potential to affect the expression of human RNAs, alter cell growth and/or differentiation, and elicit innate immune responses. In the protocols described here, a set of transient transfection assays designed to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of RNA molecules targeting post-integration steps in the HIV-1 replication cycle are described. We have used these assays to identify new ribozymes and optimize the format of shRNAs and siRNAs targeting HIV-1 RNA. The methods provide a quick set of assays that are useful for screening new anti-HIV-1 RNAs and could be adapted to screen other post-integration inhibitors of HIV-1 replication.
A limitation of current HIV-1 treatments is that they must be chronically administered to prevent disease progression. Transplant of HIV-1 resistant T lymphocyte, or hematopoietic stem cells, has the potential to provide long term control of HIV-1 replication in the absence of drug therapy1,2 and may also be an effective approach to attain an HIV-1 cure3. One way to render cells resistant to HIV-1 replication is to insert one or more genes coding for anti-HIV-1 RNAs or peptides into an infected individual's cells during an autologous transplant4. Several candidate anti-HIV-1 genes have been designed with some entering clinical trials in combinations of two5 or three6, to prevent the development of HIV-1 resistance to any single gene.
Anti-HIV-1 RNAs are among the top candidates for combination gene therapy due to their low potential to elicit immune responses and because they are transcribed from very short gene sequences. Some anti-HIV-1 RNAs have been designed to target viral entry and integration. However, most anti-HIV-1 RNAs target post-integration steps in the viral life cycle (Figure 1). Post-integration inhibitors include decoy RNAs, targeting the HIV-1 regulatory proteins Tat or Rev1, and antisense-based RNAs, targeting different sites in HIV-1 RNA, such as ribozymes7, shRNAs8 and U1i RNAs9. Methods that have been used to compare the efficacy of anti-HIV-1 RNAs include monitoring viral replication in cells transduced with genes coding for candidate RNAs and measuring viral production in cells transiently transfected with plasmids expressing candidate RNAs and an HIV-1 expression plasmid10-13. We have previously used an HIV-1 production assay to screen HIV-1 RNA for new ribozyme target sites13-15. These methods have since been refined to optimize the format of an RNA interference molecule expressed from plasmid DNA as an shRNA or delivered as a synthetic siRNA16. The assay measures the production of mature viruses from human embryonic kidney (HEK) 293T cells, and can be used to compare the effects of inhibitors that target post-integration steps in the HIV-1 replication cycle (Figure 1). For inhibitors that target pre-integration steps, alternative assays such as a TZM-bl cell infectivity assay17 are needed to evaluate antiviral efficacy.
Major safety concerns for the delivery of anti-HIV-1 RNAs in the clinic include potential off-target effects on human RNAs or proteins, and activation of innate immune sensors. To evaluate the toxicity of anti-HIV-1 siRNAs, we have used a cell viability assay in different cell lines16. We also measured activation of the double stranded RNA immune sensors, RNA activated protein kinase R (PKR) and Toll like receptor 3 (TLR3), as well as expression of the interferon stimulated gene, ADAR1 p150. These assays can be used to confirm that the efficacy of anti-HIV-1 RNAs is not due to indirect effects on cell viability or immune sensor activation. They are also useful in excluding candidate RNAs with potential toxicities from further development.
In the following protocols, procedures to identify new therapeutic RNAs and optimize the format of existing ones are described. The methods are useful for screening RNA based post-integration inhibitors of HIV-1 replication and could be adapted to screen other post-integration inhibitors, such as small molecules targeting Rev mediated export of viral RNA18 or CRISPR/Cas systems designed to target integrated HIV-1 DNA19.
1. Cells and Transfections
2. Viral Production Assay
3. Cell Viability Assay
4. Immune Activation Assay
A general schematic of the procedures is shown in Figure 2 with an example transfection plan for three test RNAs and a control RNA provided in Figure 2B. For viral production and cell viability assays, the read-out for each test construct is normalized to a negative control. Replicates are transfected in sets, so that each test RNA is normalized to its adjacent negative control. This is done to avoid inaccurate data related to the time between complexing and transfection, which may result if, for example, all of the negative controls are transfected first. Since HIV-1 can affect immune responses27,28, the cell viability and immune activation assays are done without the addition of an HIV-1 expressing plasmid.
To identify the optimal length of RNA interference molecules targeting a conserved site in HIV-1 RNA (position 1498-1519 in HIV-1 strain NL4-3)13, a set of siRNAs were designed (Figure 3A). Using the HIV-1 production assay, the percent of RT activity compared to cells transfected with a long Dicer substrate nonsense siRNA (siNS) was calculated for cells transfected with each test siRNA at different amounts of co-transfection with 100 ng of a plasmid expressing HIV-1 strain NL4-3 (Figure 3B).
Using the cell viability assay, the percent metabolism of MTT was determined for cells transfected with the most effective siRNAs identified in Figure 3B. Data were normalized to MTT metabolism in cells treated with the transfection reagent alone (Figure 4). A long double stranded RNA (Poly I:C) reduced cell viability; however, the effect was only significant at the highest dose evaluated. No significant reduction in cell viability was observed for siRNAs targeting the 1498 site in HIV-1 RNA, regardless of their length. Using the immune activation assay, the same set of RNAs were evaluated for their potential to trigger immune responses (Figure 5). In conditions where Poly I:C activated the expression of ADAR1 p150 and induced phosphorylation of PKR and IRF3, no significant effect on immune activation markers could be observed for any of the test RNAs.
Figure 1. Schematic of pre- and post-integration steps in the HIV-1 replication cycle. Pre-integration (1-3) and post-integration (4-7) steps in the HIV-1 replication cycle are shown in outlined boxes. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2. Schematic of viral production, cell viability and immune activation assays. (A) Plate adherent cells and culture for 24 hr. Cells are plated in 24-, 96- and 12- well plates in 500, 100 and 1,000 µl of cell culture media for viral production, cell viability and immune activation assays, respectively. (B) Prepare transfection tubes, transfect cells, and culture for 48 hr. An example transfection plan for a set of three test RNAs (RNA1-3) is shown with appropriate controls. The transfection procedure is also illustrated. (C) Read-out. The read-out for viral production, cell viability and immune activation assays are written and explained in detail in sections 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 3. Effect of test siRNAs on HIV-1 production. (A) Design of siRNAs with different lengths and symmetries. A conserved sequence in HIV-1 RNA (1498 target site) was used to design symmetrical and asymmetrical siRNAs (si1498-) with different lengths (17 to 29 nucleotide sense strands). The expected sense (top, black) and antisense (bottom, red) strands are indicated. (B) Inhibition of HIV-1 production by si1498 length variants. The percent (%) inhibition of HIV-1 RT activity in the supernatant of HEK293T cells transfected with symmetrical or asymmetrical si1498 length variants is shown relative to a long Dicer substrate nonsense siRNA (siNS). Each test RNA was compared to siNS at different doses in at least two independent transfections with two to three replicates. The data are expressed as mean values ± standard error means (SEMs). This figure has been modified from16, copyright American Society for Microbiology. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 4. Effect of si1498 length variants on cell viability. HEK293T cells were transfected with poly I:C at 50 and 200 µg/ml (PIC50 and PIC200) and different lengths and formats of si1498 at 100 nM. The % metabolism of MTT was determined relative to cells treated with the transfection reagent alone (Mock, M) in three independent transfections with two to three replicates. The data are expressed as mean values ± SEMs. Unpaired student t-tests were used to determine whether the different transfections significantly (*, P <0.05) reduced cell viability relative to the mock transfected cells. This figure has been modified from16, copyright American Society for Microbiology. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 5. Effect of si1498 length variants on innate immune responses. HEK293T cells were transfected with PIC50, PIC200 and different lengths and formats of si1498 at 100 nM. Activation of PKR and TLR3 were evaluated by measuring phosphorylated PKR and IRF3, respectively. Expression of an interferon stimulated gene (ISG) was evaluated by measuring the ISG ADAR1 p150 levels relative to the constitutively expressed variant, ADAR1 p110. The expression of actin was used as a loading control. This figure has been modified from16, copyright American Society for Microbiology. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Name of Buffer / Reagent | Composition |
Viral disruption cocktail | 60 mM Tris-HCl (from 1 M Tris-HCl, pH 7.8), 75 mM KCl, 5 mM MgCl2, 1.04 mM EDTA, 1% NP-40. |
Radioactive cocktail | 60 mM Tris-HCl (from 1 M Tris-HCl, pH 7.8), 75 mM KCl, 5 mM MgCl2, 1.04 mM EDTA, 10 µg/ml Poly(A), 0.33 µg/ml oligo dT. Added immediately before use: 8 mM dithiothreitol (DTT, C4H10O2S2) and 5 µl [32P] dTTP (3,000 Ci/mmol) for each 500 µl of cocktail. |
Radioactive/viral disruption cocktail | 60 mM Tris-HCl (from 1 M Tris-HCl, pH 7.8), 75 mM KCl, 5 mM MgCl2, 1.04 mM EDTA, 0.1% NP-40, 5 µg/ml Poly(A), 0.16 µg/ml oligo dT. Added immediately before use: 8 mM dithiothreitol (DTT, C4H10O2S2) and 5 µl [32P] dTTP (3,000 Ci/mmol) for each 1 ml of cocktail. |
2x SSC | 17.53 g NaCl and 8.82 g sodium citrate – 2H2O in 1 L H2O. |
Lysis buffer | 50 mM Tris-HCl (from 1 M Tris-HCl, pH 7.4), 150 mM NaCl, 5 mM EDTA (from 0.5 M, pH 8.0), 10 % v/v glycerol, 1 % v/v NP-40. |
Ponceau S | 2.5 g Ponceau S and 5 ml acetic acid in 500 ml H2O. |
TBST | 6.05 g Tris, 8.76 g NaCl and 1 ml Tween 20 in 1 L H2O. |
Table 1: Components of non-commercial buffers and reagents. Recipes for all non-commercial buffers and reagents are provided.
The HIV-1 production assay described was performed using HEK293T cells (Figure 2) and is similar to assays used to screen HIV-1 RNA for effective ribozyme13, shRNA10,29, siRNA30, and U1i RNA11,31 target sites. Using different methods to quantify HIV-1 production, most studies have measured viral production 48 hr after co-transfection of an HIV-1 expression plasmid with candidate RNAs. Following the production of HIV-1, immature virions undergo proteolytic cleavage of their polyproteins by the HIV-1 protease to become mature virions, capable of infecting new cells. For the HIV-1 RT enzyme activity assay described in steps 2.2. to 2.5., both the production and maturation steps are evaluated, since the RT enzyme is only active in mature virions. In contrast, the capsid protein and viral RNA may be present in both mature and immature virions. Therefore, quantifying HIV-1 production by p24 ELISA or RT-PCR may miss effects of therapeutic RNAs that act on the maturation step of the HIV-1 replication cycle, such as ribozymes that localize to HIV-1 virions32 and antisense-based molecules that inhibit Gag processing in addition to HIV-1 protein expression13,31. A limitation of viral production assays is that the cells used do not express the appropriate receptors for HIV-1 entry and cannot be used to evaluate the effects of therapeutic RNAs on HIV-1 entry or integration.
To evaluate the effects of anti-HIV-1 RNAs on the entire replication cycle, various HIV-1 infection models have been used in different T lymphocyte cell lines or primary blood cells5,33. Since these cell lines are difficult to transfect, more labor intensive methods such as lentiviral vector gene insertion or aptamer/peptide conjugation are necessary to deliver sufficient amounts of anti-HIV-1 RNAs to observe effects on HIV-1 replication. This limitation makes it difficult to rapidly compare the structure-activity relationship between variants of a particular anti-HIV-1 RNA or perform large-scale screening to identify the optimal target site for new classes of anti-HIV-1 RNAs. While viral production assays have been useful for identifying new anti-HIV-1 RNA molecules, alternative cellular models in easily transfected cell lines that support HIV-1 replication, such as TZM-bl cells, would be useful for screening anti-HIV-1 RNAs targeting other steps in the replication cycle, such as entry and integration.
Depending on the class of anti-HIV-1 RNA, several potential mechanisms of toxicity have been described. For example, antisense-based RNAs may have off-target effects on cellular RNAs containing the same or a similar sequence to their intended target site in HIV-1 RNA. Similarly, RNA aptamers, modeled after the trans-activation response element (TAR) or Rev response element (RRE), could affect the function of cellular proteins, such as the TAR RNA binding protein (TRBP)34. shRNAs and siRNAs have the added potential to affect the RNA interference pathway by sequestering RNAi proteins35 and some U1i molecules have been shown to affect the splicing and processing of cellular RNAs by sequestering proteins of the U1 small nuclear RNA-protein complex36. While some of these effects can be minimized by careful design, measurements of cellular toxicity in screens for new anti-HIV-1 RNA molecules are useful in excluding molecules with potential off-target effects from further development. Furthermore, off-target effects could indirectly inhibit HIV-1 production, making cellular toxicity an important measurement in validating the efficacy of new anti-HIV-1 molecules identified from HIV-1 production screens.
The cell viability assay described in steps 3.1. to 3.4. is a variation of a standard assay that has been used to screen diverse antiviral molecules37. The assay measures the activity of NAD(P)H-dependent cellular enzymes to reduce the MTT reagent to its insoluble purple form, formazan. The protocol is adapted from previously published methods38 and several kits are available using MTT or other closely related reagents. While it is important to assay cell viability in the cell line used for screening anti-HIV-1 RNAs, it should be noted that different cell lines vary in their sensitivity toward RNA-induced toxicity. For example, Reynolds et al. demonstrated that Dicer substrate siRNAs had no effect on cell viability in HEK293T cells, but significantly reduced cell viability in MCF7, DU145 and HeLa S3 cells39. For the assay described herein, HEK293T cells are used as an example (Figure 4); however, the same assay has also been done in MCF7 cells to evaluate potential toxicity in a cell line that is more sensitive to small RNA-induced toxicity16.
Since anti-HIV-1 RNAs cannot be processed and presented to the adaptive immune system, they are considered less immunogenic compared to anti-HIV-1 proteins or peptides. However, depending on their sequence or structure, they can elicit innate immune responses, and several immune sensors and signaling pathways have been identified that can respond to small RNAs (reviewed in40). In the immune activation assay described here, the levels of phosphorylated PKR and IRF3 were compared in cells transfected with small RNAs as an indication of PKR or TLR3 activation, respectively. Both RNA sensors are present in a wide range of cell lines and their activation can lead to the production of type 1 interferons and, in the case of PKR, a shut-down in translation. To evaluate the potential for anti-HIV-1 RNAs to activate the production of type 1 interferons by alternative pathways, levels of the interferon-stimulated gene ADAR1 (p150) were also compared in cells transfected with anti-HIV-1 RNAs. As demonstrated by the effects of the long dsRNA positive control, Poly I:C, all of these responses were active in HEK293T cells (Figure 5) and similar effects were observed in MCF7 cells16. Since these responses could inhibit HIV-1 production in the absence of effects on cell viability, the immune activation assay provides additional validation for the efficacy of new anti-HIV-1 RNAs. Further measurements that could be added to this evaluation include measuring the production of inflammatory cytokines and type 1 interferons in cell culture supernatant, and measuring the expression of more interferon-stimulated genes. Since HIV target cells such as CD4+ T cells and macrophages may express different levels of innate immune sensors, candidates identified from the assays described in this protocol should also be evaluated for potential immune stimulation in these cell types.
For all of the assays described, the critical step for obtaining reproducible and accurate results is the preparation of the DNA or RNA transfection tubes (step 1.3.). The plasmid DNA or RNA should be of high purity with concentrations accurately determined. It is also critical to include the appropriate controls. For evaluating new test RNA expression plasmids in the viral production assay, an appropriate negative control is the empty expression plasmid. For antisense-based RNAs, an additional negative control plasmid expressing a non-targeting RNA should also be included. Sequences for a non-targeting ribozyme and shRNA that do not affect HIV production are provided in13. For test siRNAs, the only negative control that can be used is a non-targeting RNA and an appropriate non-targeting siRNA sequence for the viral production assay is provided in16. For the cell viability and immune activation assays, the negative control should be cells treated with the transfection reagent alone and it is critical that a positive control such as Poly I:C is included to confirm that the cells are responsive to RNA-induced toxicity or immune activation. For RNA expression plasmids, the empty plasmid should also be included to ensure that the vector itself is not having toxic effects on the cells.
Overall, the assays described herein represent a good first step toward the identification of safe and effective RNA therapies for use in HIV-1 gene or drug therapy. For molecules targeting HIV-1 RNA, it is also important to consider the conservation of their target site in HIV-1 circulating strains, and detailed methods to calculate sequence conservation have been previously published15. To move a molecule forward into clinical trials, long-term toxicity and efficacy studies should be performed in primary human cells and in animal models to confirm that identified candidates will be safe and efficacious in the clinic.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
The work presented here was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) (grants DCB-120266, PPP-133377 and HBF-348967 to A.G.).
DMEM HyClone | GE Healthcare | SH30243.01 | |
FBS HyClone | GE Healthcare | SH30396.03 | |
Penicillin/Streptomycin Gibco | Thermo Fisher | 15140-122 | |
Cell culture plates, 96 well, 24 well, 6 well. | Corning | 353075, 353047, 353043 | |
Micro tubes Axygen | Corning | 311-08-051 | |
Low molecular weight Poly I:C | InvivoGen | 3182-29-6 | |
DharmaFECT-1 | Dharmacon | T-2001-01 | transfection reagent for synthetic RNAs |
TransIT-LT1 | Mirus | MIR 2300 | transfection reagent for RNA expression plasmids |
Nonidet P40 (NP-40) | USB | 19628 | |
[32P]dTTP | Perkin Elmer | BLU505H | |
poly(A) RNA template | Sigma-Aldrich | 10108626001 | |
oligo(dT)12-18 DNA primer | Thermo Fisher | 18418-012 | |
DEAE filtermat paper | Perkin Elmer | 1450-522 | |
Microplate scintillation counter | Perkin Elmer | 1450-024 | |
MTT | Sigma-Aldrich | M-2128 | |
DPBS HyClone | GE Healthcare | SH30028.02 | |
Microplate spectrophotometer | Bio-rad | 1706930 | |
Lysis buffer tablets | Roche | 4693159001, 4906837001 | protease and phosphatase inhibitors |
Microcentrifuge | Eppendorf | 5415R | |
Bradford reagent | Bio-rad | 500-0006 | |
Gel running chamber | Hoefer | SE600 | |
Semi-dry transfer cell | Bio-rad | 1703940 | |
Protein ladder EZ-Run | Thermo Fisher | BP3603-500 | |
Nitrocellulose membrane | Bio-rad | 162-0094 | |
BSA | Sigma-Aldrich | A9647-1006 | |
Antibody stripping solution | Millipore | 2504 | |
ECL – Pierce | Thermo Fisher | PI32106 | |
ADAR1 antibody | from Dr. B.L. Bass | ||
phospho-T446-PKR antibody | Abcam | ab32036 | |
phospho-S396-IRF3 antibody | Cell Signaling | 4947 | |
PKR antibody | from Dr. A. Hovanessian | ||
IRF3 antibody | Cell Signaling | 11904 | |
Actin antibody | Millipore | MAB1501 | |
Peroxidase-labeled goat anti-rabbit | KPL | 474-1506 | |
Peroxidase-labeled goat anti-mouse | KPL | 474-1806 | |
Ponceau S | Sigma-Aldrich | 6226-79-5 |