Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29209052›Full record

ArticleEmerging microbes & infections2017

Maintaining pH-dependent conformational flexibility of M1 is critical for efficient influenza A virus replication.

Meng-Jung Chiang, Faik N Musayev, Martina Kosikova, Zhengshi Lin, Yamei Gao, Philip D Mosier, Bashayer Althufairi, Zhiping Ye, Qibing Zhou, Umesh R Desai and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Emerging microbes & infections, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Meng-Jung ChiangDivision of Viral Products, Office of Vaccines Research and Review, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA.
Faik N MusayevDepartment of Medicinal Chemistry and Institute for Structural Biology, Drug Discovery and Development, School of Pharmacy, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23298, USA.
Martina KosikovaDivision of Viral Products, Office of Vaccines Research and Review, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA.
Zhengshi LinDivision of Viral Products, Office of Vaccines Research and Review, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA.
Yamei GaoDivision of Viral Products, Office of Vaccines Research and Review, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA.
Philip D MosierDepartment of Medicinal Chemistry and Institute for Structural Biology, Drug Discovery and Development, School of Pharmacy, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23298, USA.
Bashayer AlthufairiDepartment of Medicinal Chemistry and Institute for Structural Biology, Drug Discovery and Development, School of Pharmacy, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23298, USA.
Zhiping YeDivision of Viral Products, Office of Vaccines Research and Review, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA.
Qibing ZhouDepartment of Nanomedicine and Biopharmaceuticals, National Engineering Research Center for Nanomedicine, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430074, China.
Umesh R DesaiDepartment of Medicinal Chemistry and Institute for Structural Biology, Drug Discovery and Development, School of Pharmacy, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23298, USA.
Hang XieDivision of Viral Products, Office of Vaccines Research and Review, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, United States Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8318-5554
Martin K SafoDepartment of Medicinal Chemistry and Institute for Structural Biology, Drug Discovery and Development, School of Pharmacy, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23298, USA.
United States Food and Drug Administration · USVirginia Commonwealth University · USCenter for Biologics Evaluation and Research · USHuazhong University of Science and Technology · CN

Funding

Virus Vector Shared ResourceP30CA016059 · NCI · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI Keri R Maher · 1985 to 2026
$51.0M
Hemoglobin Modifiers for Sickle Cell Disease TherapyR01MD009124 · NIMHD · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI SAFO, MARTIN K · 2014 to 2018
$2.1M
Structure of cytomegalovirus nuclease, UL98R03AI115152 · NIAID · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI SAFO, MARTIN K · 2015 to 2016
$153k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016059NIAID NIH HHS R03 AI115152
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The M gene segment of influenza A virus has been shown to be a contributing factor to the high growth phenotype. However, it remains largely unknown why matrix protein 1 (M1), the major structural protein encoded by M gene, exhibits pH-dependent conformational changes during virus replication. Understanding the mechanisms underlying efficient virus replication can help to develop strategies not only to combat influenza infections but also to improve vaccine supplies. M(NLS-88R) and M(NLS-88E) are two M1 mutants differing by only a single amino acid: G88R vs G88E. G88R but not G88E was the compensatory mutation naturally selected by the virus after its nuclear localization signal was disrupted. Our study shows that, compared with M(NLS-88E) M1, M(NLS-88R) M1 dissociated quickly from viral ribonucleoproteins (vRNPs) at higher pH and took less time to dissemble in vitro, despite forming thicker matrix layer and having stronger association with vRNP in assembled virions. Correspondingly, M(NLS-88R) replicated more efficiently and was genetically more stable than M(NLS-88E). Crystallographic analysis indicated that M(NLS-88R) M1, like wild-type M1, is able to switch from a face-to-back-oriented conformation to a face-to-face-oriented conformation when pH drops from neutral to acidic, whereas G88E mutation causes M(NLS-88E) M1 to be trapped in a face-to-face-arranged conformation regardless of environmental pH. Our results suggest that maintaining M1 pH-dependent conformational flexibility is critical for efficient virus replication, and position 88 is a key residue controlling M1 pH-dependent conformational changes. Our findings provide insights into developing M1-based antiviral agents.

Indexed as

Virus ReplicationAnimalsDogsHumansHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationInfluenza A virusInfluenza, HumanMadin Darby Canine Kidney CellsModels, MolecularProtein ConformationViral Matrix ProteinsM1 protein, Influenza A virusViral Matrix Proteins

Identifiers

PMID29209052
PMCPMC5750462
OpenAlexW2775512830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.