Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for August, 2020

Is SARS-COV2 Hijacking the Complement and Coagulation Systems?

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD

In a recent Nature Medicine paper “Immune complement and coagulation dysfunction in adverse outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection” Ramlall et al. demonstrate, in a retrospective study, that a significant number of patients presenting SARS-CoV2 complications had prior incidences of macular degeneration and coagulation disorders and these previous indications are risk factors for COVID-related complications.

 

Abstract

Understanding the pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection is critical for therapeutic and public health strategies. Viral–host interactions can guide discovery of disease regulators, and protein structure function analysis points to several immune pathways, including complement and coagulation, as targets of coronaviruses. To determine whether conditions associated with dysregulated complement or coagulation systems impact disease, we performed a retrospective observational study and found that history of macular degeneration (a proxy for complement-activation disorders) and history of coagulation disorders (thrombocytopenia, thrombosis and hemorrhage) are risk factors for SARS-CoV-2-associated morbidity and mortality—effects that are independent of age, sex or history of smoking. Transcriptional profiling of nasopharyngeal swabs demonstrated that in addition to type-I interferon and interleukin-6-dependent inflammatory responses, infection results in robust engagement of the complement and coagulation pathways. Finally, in a candidate-driven genetic association study of severe SARS-CoV-2 disease, we identified putative complement and coagulation-associated loci including missense, eQTL and sQTL variants of critical complement and coagulation regulators. In addition to providing evidence that complement function modulates SARS-CoV-2 infection outcome, the data point to putative transcriptional genetic markers of susceptibility. The results highlight the value of using a multimodal analytical approach to reveal determinants and predictors of immunity, susceptibility and clinical outcome associated with infection.

Introduction

As part of a separate study, the authors mapped over 140 cellular proteins that are structurally mimicked by coronaviruses (CoVs) and identified complement and coagulation pathways as targets of this strategy across all CoV strains4. The complement system is a critical defense against pathogens, including viruses5 and when dysregulated (by germline variants or acquired through age-related effects or excessive tissue damage) can contribute to pathologies mediated by inflammation5,6,7.

“So, virally encoded structural mimics of complement and coagulation factors may contribute to CoV-associated immune-mediated pathology and indicate sensitivities in antiviral defenses.”

 

Methods and Results

  • Between 1 February 2020 and 25 April 2020, 11,116 patients presented to New York-Presbyterian/Columbia University Irving Medical Center with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection, of which 6,398 tested positive
  • Electronic health records (EHRs) were used to define sex, age and smoking history status as well as histories of macular degeneration, coagulatory disorders (thrombocytopenia, thrombosis and hemorrhage), hypertension, type 2 diabetes (T2D), coronary artery disease (CAD) and obesity (see Methods). A Python algorithm was used to analyze all confounders.
  • identified 88 patients with history of macular degeneration, 4 with complement deficiency disorders and 1,179 with coagulatory disorders).
  • observed a 35% mortality rate among patients that were put on mechanical ventilation and that 31% of deceased patients had been on mechanical respiration.
  • patients with AMD (a proxy for complement activation disorders) and coagulation disorders (thrombocytopenia, thrombosis and hemorrhage) were at significantly increased risk of adverse clinical outcomes (including mechanical respiration and death) following SARS-CoV-2 infection
  • 650 NP swabs from control and SARS-CoV-2-infected patients who presented to Weill-Cornell Medical Center were evaluated by RNA-Seq. Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) of Hallmark gene sets found that SARS-CoV-2 infection (as defined by presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA and stratified into ‘positive’, ‘low’, ‘medium’ or ‘high’ based on viral load; induces genes related to pathways with known immune modulatory functions (Fig. 2a). Moreover, among the most enriched gene sets, SARS-CoV-2 infection induces robust activation of the complement cascade (false discovery rate (FDR) P < 0.001), with increasing enrichment and significance with viral load (FDR P < 0.0001).
  • KEGG Pathway Analysis revealed KEGG_Complement_and_Coagulation_Cascades’, ‘GO_Coagulation’ and ‘Reactome_initial_triggering_of_complement’ to be significantly enriched in expression profiles of SARS-CoV-2-infected samples
  • conducted a candidate-driven study to evaluate whether genetic variation within a 60-Kb window around 102 genes with known roles in regulating complement or coagulation cascades (2,888 genetic variants fulfill this criteria of the 805,426 profiled in the UK Biobank) is associated with poor SARS-CoV-2 clinical outcome
  • identified 11 loci representing seven genes with study-wide significance. A variant of coagulation factor III (F3), variant rs72729504, was found to be associated with increased risk of adverse clinical outcome associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The analysis also identified that four variants previously reported to be associated with AMD (rs45574833, rs61821114, rs61821041 and rs12064775)15predispose carriers to hospitalization following SARS-CoV-2 infection

As authors state:

“Among the implications, the data warrant heightened public health awareness for the most vulnerable individuals and further investigation into an existing menu of complement and coagulation targeting therapies that were recently shown to be beneficial in a small cohort of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.” 26,27.

 

References

Ramlall, V., Thangaraj, P.M., Meydan, C. et al. Immune complement and coagulation dysfunction in adverse outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nat Med (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-1021-2

 

4.

Lasso, G., Honig, B. & Shapira, S. D. A sweep of earth’s virome reveals host-guided viral protein structural mimicry; with implications for human disease. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.18.159467 (2020).

 

SUMMARY

Viruses deploy an array of genetically encoded strategies to coopt host machinery and support viral replicative cycles. Molecular mimicry, manifested by structural similarity between viral and endogenous host proteins, allow viruses to harness or disrupt cellular functions including nucleic acid metabolism and modulation of immune responses. Here, we use protein structure similarity to scan for virally encoded structure mimics across thousands of catalogued viruses and hosts spanning broad ecological niches and taxonomic range, including bacteria, plants and fungi, invertebrates and vertebrates. Our survey identified over 6,000,000 instances of structural mimicry, the vast majority of which (>70%) cannot be discerned through protein sequence. The results point to molecular mimicry as a pervasive strategy employed by viruses and indicate that the protein structure space used by a given virus is dictated by the host proteome. Interrogation of proteins mimicked by human-infecting viruses points to broad diversification of cellular pathways targeted via structural mimicry, identifies biological processes that may underly autoimmune disorders, and reveals virally encoded mimics that may be leveraged to engineer synthetic metabolic circuits or may serve as targets for therapeutics. Moreover, the manner and degree to which viruses exploit molecular mimicry varies by genome size and nucleic acid type, with ssRNA viruses circumventing limitations of their small genomes by mimicking human proteins to a greater extent than their large dsDNA counterparts. Finally, we identified over 140 cellular proteins that are mimicked by CoV, providing clues about cellular processes driving the pathogenesis of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

 

26.

Risitano, A. M. Complement as a target in COVID-19?. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 20, 343–344 (2020).

 

27.

Mastaglio, S. et al. The first case of COVID-19 treated with the complement C3 inhibitor AMY-101. Clin. Immunol. 215, 108450 (2020).

 

28.

Polubriaginof, F. C. G. et al. Challenges with quality of race and ethnicity data in observational databases. J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc. 26, 730–736 (2019).

 

Read Full Post »

From LPBI Group

 

Series C: e-Books on Cancer & Oncology

 

  • Volume 1: Cancer Biology & Genomics for Disease Diagnosis. On Amazon.com since 8/11/2015

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B013RVYR2K

  • Volume 2: Cancer Therapies: Metabolic, Genomics, Interventional, Immunotherapy and Nanotechnology in Therapy Delivery (Series C Book 2). On Amazon.com since 5/18/2017

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B071VQ6YYK

 

 

From 4open-sciences.org

Current Thinking on Cancer

Guest Authors: Björn L.D.M. Brücher and Ijaz S. Jamall

New research challenges current thinking on cancer

https://www.4open-sciences.org/component/toc/?task=topic&id=1080

 

4open special issue presents a new paradigm for cancer

Imagine if we could understand and treat the root causes of cancer, rather than struggling to remove it or mainly treating its symptoms once it has already taken hold. The authors of a new peer-reviewed Special Issue of the open access journal 4open have paved the way for this vision by challenging our understanding of how cancer begins, develops, and spreads.

Entitled “Disruption of homeostasis-induced signaling and crosstalk in the carcinogenesis paradigm “Epistemology of the origin of cancer””, the Issue reveals the robust evidence for their new hypothesis about the origin of cancer. The paradigm includes a chain of six events that together explain why the vast majority of cancers develop through complex alterations in cell signaling and communication, and why most cancers are not caused by mutations as commonly believed.

This concept will radically change how we perceive and treat cancer, and even allow us to prevent cancer in the first instance.

Genetic mutations cause cancer – or do they?

“We all learn in school that cancer is caused by genetic mutations that make our cells grow uncontrollably,” says Professor Björn Brücher, an author on the Special Issue. “This belief, although confirmed for only less than 10% of cancers, has become a dogma for the origin of all cancers.”

Clearly, something is amiss. The truth is that we know a lot less about what causes cancer than you might think. In fact, researchers don’t know what causes a massive 80% of cancers. While genetic mutations are present in many advanced cancers, there is no evidence that they caused the cancer, and likely occurred after the cancer had already begun. In most cancers, the somatic mutation hypothesis simply doesn’t stack up.

Despite this, “scientists have overwhelmingly focused on genetic mutations in their quest to understand the causes of cancer” says Dr. Ijaz Jamall and that “this has been a major hurdle to advancing cancer research, and means that we have missed opportunities to explore other possibilities.”

Current cancer treatment could be better

Our failure to understand the cause of most cancers has had real-world implications in terms of how we treat them. The most common treatment methods, including surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy, deal with the symptoms of cancer rather than its causes. These treatments are arguably crude and involve cutting the tumor out or attempting to kill the cancer cells using toxic drugs or radiation. This doesn’t always work, can have serious side effects, and may set the stage for secondary cancers years later.

Newer, more sophisticated treatments, such as immunotherapy can be effective in a few cancers, but still fail to address or reverse the root cause. In fact, we currently have no way to proactively prevent cancer in a targeted way, even for cancers for which we understand the cause. We are still not close to eradicating the disease, and the prevalence of many cancers is increasing.

A new cancer paradigm

However, not all researchers have focused exclusively on genetic mutations in the search to understand the origins of cancer. A small, but growing field of research has focused on exploring alternatives. Brücher and Jamall have developed an entirely new hypothesis for the origins of most cancers, which they first announced in 2014. This plausible cancer paradigm proposes a series of six events necessary for the 80% of cancers with unknown origins, and does not rely on mutations (https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/443106).

Their hypothesis outlines a sequence of events that underlie the progression from healthy tissue to cancer. The Special Issue includes 10 papers that provide evidence to support this paradigm. One article entitled “Chronic inflammation evoked by pathogenic stimulus during carcinogenesis”, describes the biochemical and physiological signaling events involved in carcinogenesis in detail.

The process begins with a pathogenic stimulus, such as an infection, which causes inflammation in the affected tissue. Inflammation is a normal process during healing and usually resolves itself when an infection is over. This healing process is unsuccessful when the stimulus and inflammation are too great or too prolonged and the inflammation becomes chronic. Here, the disruptions that occur in biochemical and physiological homeostasis are complex, but this complexity provides many opportunities to block some of these pathways and thereby reduce the risk of developing cancer.

If chronic inflammation persists, it can cause fibrosis. Fibrosis is a process similar to scar formation where cells called fibroblasts grow and form fibrous tissue. As detailed in another article in the issue, “Precancerous niche (PCN), a product of fibrosis with remodeling by incessant chronic inflammation, fibrosis caused by chronic inflammation drastically changes the cellular environment affected by it.

This altered cellular environment and accompanying changes in the levels of biochemical signaling molecules lead to a precancerous state. If the body’s attempts to escape this situation prove ineffective, then the affected cells may transition into cancer cells.

Inflammation and cancer

While it may seem strange to think of inflammation as part of the carcinogenic process, researchers have known about the link between inflammation and cancer for a long time. For example, chronic inflammation was first reported in testicular cancer in chimney sweeps in 1755. While researchers had previously observed the link between inflammation and cancer, no one had identified the complex multi-step processes involved and assembled them into a coherent hypothesis, until recently. This includes a dysregulation in homeostasis, which is the body’s tendency to maintain complex biochemical events within a range that maintains health.

Many carcinogenic substances cause inflammation and there are numerous examples of cancers linked to it. For instance, asbestos fibers cause inflammation and lung cancer, without genetic mutations. Hepatitis C infection can cause chronic inflammation in the liver, which can progress to liver cancer with no mutations. In patients with inflammatory bowel disease, the risk of cancer is increased 20 to 30-fold. Human papilloma virus acts in a similar manner to cause cervical cancer and oropharyngeal cancers.

Brücher and Jamall are not alone in recognizing the importance of inflammation in cancer others have also drawn attention to the link between infections in early life with the later risk of colon and breast cancer, and discussed the potential of anti-inflammatory drugs to reduce this risk.

What could this new paradigm mean for cancer patients?

The interplay between pathogens, inflammation, fibrosis, and cancer cell development involves a huge range of complex biochemical signaling molecules and aberrant cell behaviors. Untangling these relationships to discover the exact mechanisms involved is an ongoing process. However, rather than being a hurdle, this complexity affords an opportunity for cancer patients in the form of new treatment options, and potentially even preventative treatments.

“This cancer paradigm offers many processes that we could target to prevent and even reverse the process of carcinogenesis before it is complete,” explains Brücher. “For example, a drug that reduces inflammation or fibrosis could potentially prevent cancer from developing” states Jamall. Developing treatments that address the root causes of cancer could be a game changer for patients.

This approach could mean that cancer goes from a lethal disease to a disease of inconvenience, such as diabetes.

Given the importance of these findings, the authors are delighted to publish their peer-reviewed Special Issue in 4open, an open access journal, making information about this new paradigm more easily available to the public and researchers alike. Open access publishing is crucial for the widespread dissemination of ground-breaking ideas and results, allowing the scientific community to freely share new information that could change the course of research and medicine.

This “Key Summaries” article is brought to you in collaboration with SciencePOD.

 

4open: Special issue

Disruption of homeostasis-induced signaling and crosstalk in the carcinogenesis paradigm “Epistemology of the origin of cancer”

Obul R. Bandapalli (Guest Editor)

Export the citation of the selected articles Export
Select all

SOURCE

https://www.4open-sciences.org/component/toc/?task=topic&id=1080

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts