The VP1 BC loop of EV71 is suitable for foreign peptide insertion without altering capsid structure or uncoating, providing a structural basis for multivalent HFMD vaccine design.
Supports VP1 BC loop insertion for EV71 chimeras; leaves open translation to multivalent HFMD vaccines in clinical settings.
Hand-foot-and-mouth disease (HFMD) remains a major health concern in the Asia-Pacific regions, and its major causative agents include human enterovirus 71 (EV71) and coxsackievirus A16. A desirable vaccine against HFMD would be multivalent and able to elicit protective responses against multiple HFMD causative agents. Previously, we have demonstrated that a thermostable recombinant EV71 vaccine candidate can be produced by the insertion of a foreign peptide into the BC loop of VP1 without affecting viral replication. Here we present crystal structures of two different naturally occurring empty particles, one from a clinical C4 strain EV71 and the other from its recombinant virus containing an insertion in the VP1 BC loop. Crystal structure analysis demonstrated that the inserted foreign peptide is well exposed on the particle surface without significant structural changes in the capsid. Importantly, such insertions do not seem to affect the virus uncoating process as illustrated by the conformational similarity between an uncoating intermediate of another recombinant virus and that of EV71. Especially, at least 18 residues from the N terminus of VP1 are transiently externalized. Altogether, our study provides insights into vaccine development against HFMD. Background: No HFMD vaccine is available. Results: Structures of EV71 recombinant virus particles were determined showing that the inserted foreign peptide is exposed on the particle surface without capsid structural changes and that virus uncoating is not affected. Conclusion: VP1 BC loop is suitable for foreign peptide insertion for the generation of recombinant EV71 viruses. Significance: The results provide insights into vaccine development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lyu et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: