Natural Killer Cells: Taking on SARS-CoV-2
Responding to a viral infection is a complex, multistep process that involves a multitude of immune actors. Innate immunity acts first, deploying a battery of cellular and molecular entities which are not specific to the invading pathogen. Natural killer cells, for instance, are powerful antiviral agents which can recognize and kill cells infected with a broad range of viruses (Björkström et al., 2022). An adaptive immune response is then mounted, which specifically targets the virus causing the infection. For example, antibodies precisely selected to bind to a range of viral proteins are produced and released in large numbers. In the case of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, both innate and adaptive responses are considered to be essential for the control of infection (Merad et al., 2022).
For natural killer cells to eliminate their targets, a number of stress-induced molecules must first be displayed on the surface of infected cells; there, they can be recognized by receptors on natural killer cells, a process which activates the cells’ killing programme. However, some natural killer cells also recognize infected cells by harnessing virus-specific antibodies produced by the adaptive immune response. This mechanism, known as antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC), involves natural killer cells expressing an activating receptor which interacts with the tail end of antibodies.
Despite the efficiency of natural killer cells, viruses often have a broad arsenal of strategies at their disposal to escape these cells. Whether SARS-CoV-2 actively evades early natural killer cell response, and whether antibodies engage these cells via ADCC to protect against COVID-19, remains unclear. Now, in eLife, Richard Stanton and colleagues at various institutions in the United Kingdom – including Ceri Fielding of Cardiff University as first author – report results showing how SARS-CoV-2 interferes with the recognition processes of natural killer cells during the early stages of infection (Fielding et al., 2022).
First, the team screened which proteins are expressed on the surface of infected cells. This showed that SARS-CoV-2 actively evades natural killer cells by preventing the synthesis of several ligands that bind to natural killer cell’s receptors (Figure 1A). Further experiments revealed the identity of the SARS-CoV-2 proteins which could be responsible for this effect: the viral proteins Nsp1 and Nsp14, which could cooperate to reduce the expression of a number of surface proteins recognized by natural killer cells. The viral proteins likely perform this role by degrading the mRNA coding for the ligands and inhibiting translation in the cell; according to previous reports, this strategy has also been used against other factors involved in the innate immune response (Hsu et al., 2021; Thoms et al., 2020). Interestingly, however, recent evidence suggests that the related viral protein Nsp13 can actually increase the activation of natural killer cells by interfering with a receptor which inhibits the cells’ killing response (Hammer et al., 2022). How these opposing effects of SARS-CoV-2 affect the way natural killer cells control infections in vivo remains to be determined.
Fielding et al. then showed that natural killer cells can be efficiently triggered by antibodies bound to SARS-CoV-2-infected cells (Figure 1B), demonstrating that the ADCC mechanism can activate these cells during COVID-19 infection. However, the antibodies triggering ADCC were not the ones targeting the spike protein, the viral component used in many current vaccines. In fact, further experiments revealed that vaccination-induced antibodies targeting the spike protein poorly engaged natural killer cells, a result in line with a study showing that vaccination-induced antibodies are not as good at mediating ADCC compared to infection-induced antibodies (Rieke et al., 2022). Fielding et al. then went on to reveal that the antibodies involved in ADCC were those produced in reaction to other viral proteins expressed at the surface of infected cells. In most COVID-19 patients, the infection-induced antibodies able to trigger ADCC persisted for at least six months.
Together, these results suggest that it could be possible to improve vaccine design by adding viral proteins which induce antibodies capable of triggering ADCC in natural killer cells to the current formulation. In addition, promoting natural killer cell activity by boosting ADCC response in patients with severe COVID-19 could become a therapeutic option, as these individuals show high levels of antibodies and impaired natural killer cell function (Merad et al., 2022; Witkowski et al., 2021).
References
-
Natural killer cells in antiviral immunityNature Reviews Immunology 22:112–123.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41577-021-00558-3
-
Natural killer cell-mediated antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity against SARS-CoV-2 after natural infection is more potent than after vaccinationThe Journal of Infectious Diseases 225:1688–1693.https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiac060
-
Structural basis for translational shutdown and immune evasion by the Nsp1 protein of SARS-CoV-2Science (New York, N.Y.) 369:1249–1255.https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abc8665
Article and author information
Author details
Publication history
Copyright
© 2022, Kučan Brlić and Brizić
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 922
- views
-
- 190
- downloads
-
- 2
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Further reading
-
- Immunology and Inflammation
- Microbiology and Infectious Disease
The parasitic nematode Heligmosomoides polygyrus bakeri secretes the HpARI family, which bind to IL-33, either suppressing (HpARI1 and HpARI2) or enhancing (HpARI3) responses to the cytokine. We previously showed that HpARI2 also bound to DNA via its first complement control protein (CCP1) domain. Here, we find that HpARI1 can also bind DNA, while HpARI3 cannot. Through the production of HpARI2/HpARI3 CCP1 domain-swapped chimeras, DNA-binding ability can be transferred, and correlates with in vivo half-life of administered proteins. We found that HpARI1 and HpARI2 (but not HpARI3) also binds to the extracellular matrix component heparan sulphate (HS), and structural modelling showed a basic charged patch in the CCP1 domain of HpARI1 and HpARI2 (but not HpARI3) which could facilitate these interactions. Finally, a mutant of HpARI2 was produced which lacked DNA and HS binding, and was also shown to have a short half-life in vivo. Therefore, we propose that during infection the suppressive HpARI1 and HpARI2 proteins have long-lasting effects at the site of deposition due to DNA and/or extracellular matrix interactions, while HpARI3 has a shorter half-life due to a lack of these interactions.
-
- Immunology and Inflammation
We analyzed here how formin-like 1 β (FMNL1β), an actin cytoskeleton-regulatory protein, regulates microtubule-organizing center (MTOC) and multivesicular bodies (MVB) polarization and exosome secretion at an immune synapse (IS) model in a phosphorylation-dependent manner. IS formation was associated with transient recruitment of FMNL1β to the IS, which was independent of protein kinase C δ (PKCδ). Simultaneous RNA interference of all FMNL1 isoforms prevented MTOC/MVB polarization and exosome secretion, which were restored by FMNL1βWT expression. However, expression of the non-phosphorylatable mutant FMNL1βS1086A did not restore neither MTOC/MVB polarization nor exosome secretion to control levels, supporting the crucial role of S1086 phosphorylation in MTOC/MVB polarization and exosome secretion. In contrast, the phosphomimetic mutant, FMNL1βS1086D, restored MTOC/MVB polarization and exosome secretion. Conversely, FMNL1βS1086D mutant did not recover the deficient MTOC/MVB polarization occurring in PKCδ-interfered clones, indicating that S1086 FMNL1β phosphorylation alone is not sufficient for MTOC/MVB polarization and exosome secretion. FMNL1 interference inhibited the depletion of F-actin at the central region of the immune synapse (cIS), which is necessary for MTOC/MVB polarization. FMNL1βWT and FMNL1βS1086D, but not FMNL1βS1086A expression, restored F-actin depletion at the cIS. Thus, actin cytoskeleton reorganization at the IS underlies the effects of all these FMNL1β variants on polarized secretory traffic. FMNL1 was found in the IS made by primary T lymphocytes, both in T cell receptor (TCR) and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-evoked synapses. Taken together, these results point out a crucial role of S1086 phosphorylation in FMNL1β activation, leading to cortical actin reorganization and subsequent control of MTOC/MVB polarization and exosome secretion.