Comparison of the Expression Kinetics and Immunostimulatory Activity

Subscriber access provided by READING UNIV

Article

Comparison of the expression kinetics and immunostimulatory activity of replicating mRNA, non-replicating mRNA and pDNA after intradermal electroporation in pigs Bregje Leyman, Hanne Huysmans, Séan Mc Cafferty, Francis Combes, Eric Cox, Bert Devriendt, and Niek N. Sanders Mol. Pharmaceutics, Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.7b00722 • Publication Date (Web): 03 Jan 2018 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on January 4, 2018

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

Molecular Pharmaceutics is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Molecular Pharmaceutics

1 2

Comparison of the expression kinetics and immunostimulatory activity of replicating mRNA, non-replicating mRNA and pDNA after intradermal electroporation in pigs

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Bregje Leyman1,4, Hanne Huysmans1,4, Séan Mc Cafferty1,2, Francis Combes1,2, Eric Cox3,

11

Bert Devriendt3, Niek N. Sanders1,2*

12 1

13

Ethology, Laboratory for Gene Therapy, Heidestraat 19, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium

14

2

15 16 17 18

Ghent University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Nutrition, Genetics and

3

Cancer Research Institute (CRIG), Ghent University, Belgium

Ghent University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Virology, Parasitology and Immunology, Salisburylaan 133, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium *

Corresponding author:

Email address: [email protected]

19 20

Tel: +32 9 264 78 08

4

These authors contributed equally to this work

1 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Molecular Pharmaceutics 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 2 of 26

21

Abstract

22

Synthetic mRNA is becoming increasingly popular as an alternative to pDNA-based gene

23

therapy. Currently, multiple synthetic mRNA platforms have been developed. In this study we

24

investigated the expression kinetics and the changes in mRNA encoding cytokine and

25

chemokine levels following intradermal electroporation in pigs of pDNA, self-replicating

26

mRNA, modified- and unmodified mRNA. The self-replicating mRNA tended to induce the

27

highest protein expression, followed by pDNA, modified mRNA and unmodified mRNA.

28

Interestingly, the self-replicating mRNA was able to maintain its high expression levels

29

during at least 12 days. In contrast, the expression of pDNA and the non-replicating mRNAs

30

dropped after respectively one and two days. Six days after intradermal electroporation a

31

dose-dependent expression was observed for all vectors. Again, also at lower doses, the self-

32

replicating mRNA tended to show the highest expression. All the mRNA vectors, including

33

the modified mRNA, induced elevated levels of mRNA encoding cytokines and chemokines

34

in the porcine skin after intradermal electroporation, while no such response was noticed after

35

intradermal electroporation of the pDNA vector.

36 37

Keywords: Pigs, pDNA, mRNA-therapeutics, luciferase expression, innate immune response

38 39 40 41 42 43 2 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 3 of 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


44

Introduction

45

Nucleic acid-encoded drugs based on plasmid DNA (pDNA) and messenger RNA (mRNA)

46

form a potential new drug class with multiple applications such as protein replacement

47

therapy and vaccination for cancer and infectious diseases1,2. One of the first reports on the

48

use of pDNA and mRNA to express proteins in vivo dates from the 1990s, when Wolff et al.

49

made the observation that intramuscular injection of mice with non-formulated pDNA or

50

mRNA coding for a luciferase reporter protein, resulted in the detection of this protein3.

51

Nevertheless, after this report the field of gene therapy has been dominated for many years by

52

a focus on pDNA and viral vectors. This conservative attitude was based on the belief that

53

mRNA is a very fragile and instable molecule4. However, after more than two decades of

54

research the goal of commercialization of pDNA based vaccines for human usage has not

55

been reached. The reason for this is not clear but might be a consequence of several

56

drawbacks of pDNA. For example, pDNA vectors have a low efficacy in non- or slow

57

dividing cells5, they are sensitive to epigenetic silencing6, they often contain an antibiotic

58

resistance gene and they result, after e.g. intramuscular injection, in a long-term uncontrolled

59

expression7,8. This long-term expression might be an advantage for applications such as

60

protein replacement therapy reducing the dosage frequency of the treatment, but may be a

61

disadvantage for other applications such as vaccination. Although viral vectors are more

62

effective, they are also afflicted with important disadvantages like a complex production

63

process and their ability to trigger immune responses against viral epitopes on the vector9-11.

64

Additionally, some viral vectors integrate in the genome of the host12. As an alternative to

65

pDNA and viral vectors, in vitro transcribed (IVT) mRNA (synthetic mRNA) is becoming

66

increasingly popular. In contrast to pDNA and viral vectors, mRNA-based therapeutics are

67

expressed very efficiently in dividing and non-dividing cells despite the lower stability as a

68

consequence of the ubiquitous RNases. Additionally, they also do not contain antibiotic 3 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 4 of 26

69

resistance genes, carry virtually no risk of genomic integration and oncogenic mutagenesis

70

and their expression is limited in time1,13-15. Multiple synthetic mRNA platforms, such as

71

unmodified mRNA, modified mRNA and self-replicating mRNA, are currently available.

72

After intracellular delivery of unmodified synthetic mRNAs, pattern recognition receptors

73

(PRRs), such as toll-like receptors (TLRs), NOD-like receptors and RIG-like receptors, sense

74

the mRNA and trigger an innate immune response that is characterized by the production of

75

cytokines and chemokines (e.g. INF-β, IL-6, IL-12, CCL-5 and CXCL-10)16,17. The

76

formulation of synthetic mRNA into particles increases the capacity of synthetic mRNA to

77

stimulate the innate immune system because these particles mostly end up in endosomes,

78

which contain the RNA sensing TLRs 3, 7 and 818. Notwithstanding that the innate

79

immunostimulatory effects of unmodified mRNA may serve as an intrinsic adjuvant, and

80

hence might be a major benefit for vaccination, it might hamper the mRNA translation

81

process and trigger mRNA degradation19. Therefore, researchers have tried to decrease the

82

capacity of synthetic mRNA to stimulate the innate immune system by incorporating

83

modified nucleotides such as pseudouridine (Ψ), N(1)-methyl-pseudouridine (m1Ψ), 5-

84

methylcytidine (m5C), N6-methyladenosine (m6A), 5-methyluridine (m5U), or 2-thiouridine

85

(s2U)16,19,20. Beside these two non-replicating mRNA platforms, also self-replicating mRNA

86

is gaining more and more attention. Self-replicating mRNAs are mostly based on positive-

87

stranded RNA viruses, like alphaviruses, and contain RNA-dependent RNA polymerase genes

88

responsible for amplifying the transgene which replaced the structural viral proteins1,21. Self-

89

replicating mRNAs are inherently immunostimulatory, as several single stranded and double

90

stranded RNA species are formed during the amplification process, which can activate PRRs

91

resulting in secretion of type I IFNs22. Despite the many studies that used mRNA for protein

92

replacement therapies and for vaccination against e.g. cancer, allergies, viral- and bacterial

93

infections, mRNA-based therapeutics are far from a commercial product1,17,23-28. Moreover,


Page 5 of 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


94

most of those studies are based on small animal models (mainly mice) that poorly mimic

95

humans. The evaluation of nucleic acid-encoded drugs in large animals (> 10 kg), such as e.g.

96

pigs that are physiologically more closely related to humans than mice, is uncommon24,29.

97

Additionally, a side-by-side comparison of the expression efficacy and immunogenicity of

98

pDNA and the abovementioned different mRNA platforms has not been performed. In this

99

study the expression kinetics and the capacity to stimulate the innate immune system of either

100

(1) pDNA, (2) self-replicating mRNA, (3) modified- or (4) unmodified mRNA was compared

101

in a porcine model. Because of our interest in mRNA vaccination, we focused on intradermal

102

electroporation as the skin is extremely immuno-competent and easily accessible.

103

Additionally, porcine and human skin show several anatomical, immunological and

104

physiological similarities30. The data of this study might be very useful for the further

105

development of synthetic mRNA-based therapeutics, and especially the development of

106

mRNA-based vaccines.

107

Materials and methods

108

Mice and pigs

109

Seven week old female Balb/c mice (Janvier, France) were housed in individually ventilated

110

cages at 25 °C under natural day-night rhythm with ad libitum access to feed and water and

111

enriched with mouse houses and nesting material. Belgian landrace pigs of 12 weeks old were

112

housed together at 25 °C under natural day-night rhythm with ad libitum access to feed and

113

water. Experiments were started after an acclimatization period of at least 1 week. At the start

114

of the experiments the pigs weighed about 35-40 kg. All in vivo experiments were approved

115

by the ethical committee of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University (EC

116

2013/57, 2015/77 and 2015/156).

117

Plasmids



Page 6 of 26

118

The pGL4.13 [luc2/SV40] plasmid (pDNA) was purchased from Promega (Wisconsin, USA)

119

and contains the luc2 reporter gene and the SV40 early enhancer/promotor and a synthetic β-

120

lactamase (Ampr) coding region. This plasmid contains 293 CpG motifs (i.e. 63 CpG per 1000

121

base pair (bp); the sequence can be found at GenBank accession number AY738225.1).

122

pTK160 (11519 bp.) and pTK305 (4112 bp.) plasmids were used to produce the self-

123

replicating or (un)modified mRNAs by in vitro transcription (IVT). pTK305 and pTK160

124

contain, besides the luciferase gene, a bacteriophage T7 polymerase promoter, 5′ and 3′

125

untranslated regions (UTRs) and consensus recognition sequences for the I-SceI

126

endonuclease. pTK160 also contains nonstructural proteins (nSP1-4) of the Venezuelan

127

equine encephalitis virus (VEEV), that form the replicase complex. All constructs contain the

128

same Fluc2 gene (protein ID = AAV52875.1) which has been codon optimized for

129

mammalian expression. Conformity of the luciferase transcripts is essential for proper

130

comparison and subsequent selection of the most suited construct for future applications.

131

mRNA in vitro transcription

132

The unmodified and modified mRNAs were produced by IVT of the I-SceI-linearized

133

pTK305 plasmid using a MEGAscript T7 transcription Kit (Invitrogen, Massachusetts, USA)

134

with unmodified nucleotides or the m1Ψ modified nucleotides (Tebu-bio, Belgium) replacing

135

all the non-modified equivalents. The self-replicating mRNA was produced from the I-SceI-

136

linearized pTK160 plasmid using the same kit and unmodified nucleotides. Next, the mRNAs

137

were purified and capped using vaccinia virus capping enzymes and 2’-O-Methyltransferase

138

(Cellscript, Wisconsin, USA) to create cap1 and were then again purified using the RNeasy®

139

Mini kit (Qiagen, Germany). The self-replicating mRNAs have a poly(A) tail of 40

140

adenosines. The non-replicating mRNAs also have a poly(A) tail of 40 adenosines after IVT,

141

but for these mRNAs the poly(A) tail was extended by poly(A)tailing with the A-plusTM

142

Poly(A) polymerase Tailing Kit (Cellscript) to approximately 200 adenosines, followed by 6 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 7 of 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


143

purification. All mRNA’s were quantified using a Nanodrop spectrophotometer (Thermo

144

Fisher Scientific, Massachusetts, USA) and the purity was determined by formamide agarose

145

gel electrophoresis as described previously31. The biological activity of each new batch of

146

mRNA was compared with that of previous batches. To this extent 5 µg of mRNA (dissolved

147

in 50 µl phosphate buffer saline (Ca2+ and Mg2+ free Dulbecco's Phosphate-Buffered Saline,

148

PBS, Ambion, Massachusetts, USA) was intradermally (ID) injected in mice (n = 3).

149

Injections were immediately followed by needle electroporation (AgilePulse, BTX Harvard

150

Apparatus, Massachusetts, USA) of the injection spot as described previously9 and the

151

bioluminescence was measured after 24 h, using an IVIS Lumina II (PerkinElmer, Belgium)

152

and the photon flux (photons/s) in the region of interest was calculated using the Living

153

IMAGE Software 4.3.1. Bioluminescence of untreated skin was measured and used as

154

background. The molecular weight of all final products was calculated by loading the

155

sequences of the mRNAs and pDNA into OligoCalc: an online oligonucleotide properties

156

calculator of Kibbe WA.

157

Optimization of ex vivo quantification of firefly luciferase expression

158

In vivo imaging of firefly luciferase expression in pigs is not possible, due to the size of the

159

animals. Therefore, we decided to measure the bioluminescence signal ex vivo after excision

160

of the injection spots. However, the storage time and temperature of the excised samples may

161

affect the bioluminescence signal. Therefore, we first determined the optimal storage

162

condition of the biopsies in mice. In more detail, Balb/c mice were ID injected with pDNA

163

coding for luciferase (20 µg in 50 µl PBS), followed by electroporation, as described before9.

164

Forty-eight hours after the injection 8 mm diameter skin punch biopsies (Miltex, The

165

Netherlands) were taken from the injection sites. All mice were humanely euthanized before

166

skin biopsies were taken. Half of the biopsies (n = 4) were immediately immersed in 24-well

167

plates containing 600 µl ice cold D-luciferin solution (15 mg D-luciferin (Gold 7 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 8 of 26

168

Biotechnology, Missouri, USA) per ml PBS). The other half was immediately immersed in

169

600 µl warm (37 °C) D-luciferin solution. After 15 min incubation on ice or at 37°C, the

170

bioluminescence signal was measured. Additionally, we also followed the evolution of the

171

bioluminescence signal in four excised spots during 90 min. This was done in a similar

172

manner as described above using an incubation on ice as this condition gave the best results

173

(see supplementary Figure 1 for results). These data showed that skin biopsies should be

174

immediately transferred to an ice-cold D-luciferin solution which is placed on ice.

175

Additionally, the bioluminescence signal should be measured as soon as possible after biopsy

176

using a fixed time point (in this study we used 18 min) after biopsy.

177

Analysis of pDNA and mRNA expression in pigs: kinetics and dose dependency

178

One week after arrival of the pigs, five rectangular (1 cm x 2 cm)-sites were shaved and

179

marked using tattoo ink (MS Schippers, Belgium) on the back of each pig, for later

180

identification of the injection sites. Subsequently, the expression kinetics of pDNA,

181

unmodified mRNA, modified mRNA and self-replicating mRNA was studied after

182

intradermal injection of 20 µg of the different vectors (dissolved in 50 µl PBS) in the marked

183

spots. Control spots were injected with PBS. Injection spots were immediately electroporated

184

using 4 mm gap needle array electrodes (needle length 5 mm) using the AgilePulse-BTX

185

Harvard Apparatus-program-protocol (two pulses of 450 V with a pulse duration of 0.050 ms

186

and a pulse interval of 0.2 ms; and subsequently after 50 ms eight pulses of 110 V with a

187

pulse duration of 10 ms and a pulse interval of 20 ms). One-, two-, six- and twelve days

188

following administration, the luciferase expression of the different mRNA vectors and the

189

pDNA was determined by taking a skin punch biopsy of the injection spots. Ex vivo

190

bioluminescent imaging of the biopsies occurred as optimized in mice. For each construct

191

(including control) and time point we had five injection spots. Additionally, we also evaluated

192

the dose dependency of the luciferase expression. For that purpose, pigs were again shaved 8 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 9 of 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


193

and marked. The marked spots were subsequently ID electroporated with 1, 5 or 20 µg of

194

each of the luciferase expression mRNA vectors and pDNA. After 1 and 6 days all animals

195

were humanely euthanized, skin biopsies were collected, and ex vivo bioluminescent imaging

196

occurred as optimized previously in mice. For each dose and time point we included 4

197

injection spots.

198

Analysis of the local innate immune response after intradermal electroporation of pDNA

199

and mRNA vectors in pigs

200

To study the effect on the innate immune system of each of the luciferase expression vectors,

201

pigs were ID injected with 20 µg of (1) pDNA, (2) self-replicating mRNA, (3) modified

202

mRNA, (4) unmodified mRNA and (5) PBS as a control. All injections were immediately

203

followed by electroporation as described above. Twenty-four hours later, pigs were humanely

204

sacrificed, and skin biopsies were taken from the injection sites, and immediately frozen in

205

RNAlater (Sigma-Aldrich, Germany) and stored at -20 °C until further analysis. RNA was

206

isolated from the biopsies following the RNAzol® RT protocol (Sigma-Aldrich). RNA

207

concentrations were assessed at 260 nm by a Nanodrop spectrophotometer (Thermo Fisher

208

Scientific) and the purity of the RNA samples was checked using an Experion RNA StdSens

209

Analysis kit (Bio-rad Laboratories, California, USA). Reverse transcription was carried out

210

using the RT² First Strand kit (Qiagen) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Purity

211

and quantity were assessed again after reverse transcription. Prior to gene expression analysis

212

using the commercially available RT² profiler PCR Array (PASS-122Z pig antiviral response,

213

Qiagen), the cDNA template was mixed with RT² SYBR Green mastermix (Qiagen) and

214

diluted with RNase-free water according to the RT² profiler PCR Array Handbook from

215

Qiagen. Thermo-cycling was performed in 384-well plates and parameters were set as

216

described in the manufacturer’s protocol.

217

Statistical analysis 9 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 10 of 26

218

Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism 6 (GraphPad Software, California,

219

USA). Differences between groups were analysed by means of a non-parametric Kruskal-

220

Wallis test and a post-hoc test following Dunn using the Benjamini-Hochberg correction for

221

multiple testing. The qPCR results were analyzed using the CFX manager software v3.0 (Bio-

222

Rad Laboratories) by a Gene Study with normalized expression (∆∆Cq) based on the mean

223

efficiency corrected CT-value and after inter-run calibration. A P-value of p < 0.05 was

224

considered significant.

225

Results

226

The transfection capacity of self-replicating mRNA outperforms pDNA and non-

227

replicating mRNA in the porcine skin

228

The luciferase expression of the different mRNA vectors was slightly below that of pDNA

229

one day after intradermal electroporation in pigs (Figure1). Interestingly, at day 1 and 2 the

230

luciferase expression of the different mRNA vectors was similar and not significantly

231

different from each other. While the average luciferase expression of modified and

232

unmodified mRNA showed a 2.5 and 5-fold decrease at day 6 and 12 respectively, the

233

average luciferase signal of the self-replicating mRNA showed, compared to the expression

234

on day 1 and 2, a slight increase at day 6 and 12 (Figure 1). The pDNA luciferase expression

235

levels tended to outperform the mRNA luciferase expression levels one day after injection,

236

however, the average pDNA signal dropped below the signal of all mRNAs on day 2, and was

237

inferior to the signal of the self-replicating mRNA until the end of the experiment. After day 2

238

the expression of the pDNA stayed constant till day 6 and subsequently showed a further brief

239

drop at day 12 (Figure 1). Note that no significant differences have been noticed and only

240

trends could be observed. We also calculated the area under the curve as a measure of the

241

total amount of luciferase produced during the 12-day follow-up period (Figure 2). Although

242

no significant differences could be observed, Figure 2 shows that self-replicating mRNA 10 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 11 of 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


243

tends to perform better than pDNA, unmodified as well as modified non-replicating mRNA

244

after intradermal electroporation in pigs.

245

246 247

Figure 1. Quantification of the mean bioluminescence signal after intradermal electroporation

248

of the mRNA vectors and pDNA in pigs. Skin biopsies of the injection spots were taken 1

249

day, 2 days, 6 days and 12 days after intradermal electroporation of 20 µg of either self-

250

replicating mRNA (3.83 x 1012 molecules), unmodified mRNA (1.49 x 1013 molecules),

251

modified mRNA (1.48 x 1013 molecules), or pDNA (4.20 x 1012 molecules mole). The value

252

between brackets is the copy number, i.e. the number of molecules present in 20 µg of the

253

vectors. The mean value of the total flux (p/s) is given along with the standard error of the

254

mean (SEM). No significant (p > 0.05) differences were observed. Each data point is the

255

mean of five biopsies obtained from five different pigs. The dotted line represents the

256

background signal (Bkg).



Page 12 of 26

257 258

Figure 2. The area under the curve (AUC) of the bioluminescence signal versus time graphs

259

was calculated, along with the SEM, over a period of 12 days after intradermal

260

electroporation of 20 µg of either self-replicating mRNA (3.83 x 1012 molecules), unmodified

261

mRNA (1.49 x 1013 molecules), modified mRNA (1.48 x 1013 molecules), or pDNA (4.20 x

262

1012 molecules). For these calculations, the bioluminescence signal of the negative controls

263

was subtracted from all data points. The value between brackets is the copy number, i.e. the

264

number of molecules present in 20 µg of the vectors. Each bar is the mean of five biopsies

265

obtained from five different pigs (n=5). No significant differences could be detected.

266

Effect of the vector dose on the luciferase expression

267

The expression level of different pDNA and mRNA doses (1 µg, 5 µg, 20 µg) were compared

268

1 and 6 days after intradermal electroporation (Figure 3). One day after injection, a real dose-

269

dependent effect on the luciferase expression was not noticed for the non-replicating mRNAs

270

and the pDNA. Nevertheless, the expression of pDNA tends to show an increase when 20 µg

271

was used. Surprisingly, one day after administration, the self-replicating mRNA showed the

272

highest expression at the lowest dose (1 µg), while the two other doses (5 and 20 µg) showed

273

a circa three-fold lower expression (Figure 3). Six days after intradermal electroporation the


Page 13 of 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


274

expression levels of all vectors and doses showed a huge drop, except the expression level of

275

the self-replicating mRNA, which showed a slight increase when a dose of 20 µg was

276

administered (Figure 3). Additionally, a more clear dose-dependent expression was observed

277

for all mRNA vectors and pDNA six days after intradermal electroporation but no significant

278

differences could be observed.

279

280 281

Figure 3. Dose-dependent expression after intradermal electroporation in pigs of 1 µg, 5 µg

282

and 20 µg of the mRNA vectors or pDNA. The bioluminescence signal in the punch biopsies

283

was measured one day and six days after injection. The average value of the total flux (p/s) in

284

the skin biopsies from four pigs (1 µg and 5 µg) or five pigs (20 µg) is given along with its

285

SEM. The dotted line represents the background signal (Bkg). At each dose and time point

286

the expression levels of the different vectors were not significantly different. Note that in the

287

x-axis also the copy number of each vector is shown in mole.

288

Electroporation of synthetic mRNA but not pDNA induces transcriptional changes

289

associated with an innate immune response in the porcine skin 13 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 14 of 26

290

Next we analyzed the capacity of the synthetic mRNAs and pDNA to provoke changes in the

291

transcriptome of cytokines and chemokines involved in the pig antiviral immune response

292

after intradermal electroporation in pigs. Elevated expression of mRNAs coding for these

293

cytokines and chemokines might give us information about the immune stimulatory properties

294

of the different constructs. Depending on this potential, the constructs can be used for

295

different applications. A strong self-adjuvant effect can be advantageous for mRNA based

296

vaccines. For protein-replacement therapies, however, stimulation of the innate immune

297

system should be kept to a minimum17. Twenty-four hours after intradermal electroporation of

298

20 µg of either (1) pDNA, (2) unmodified mRNA, (3) modified mRNA and, (4) self-

299

replicating mRNA the innate immune response was characterized by analyzing the expression

300

level of 84 cytokines and chemokines in the injections spots (Figure 4). Intradermal

301

electroporation of pDNA did, compared to control (i.e. PBS plus electroporation), not

302

significantly affect the mRNA expression level of any of the tested genes. In contrast, self-

303

replicating mRNA, 1mψ-modified mRNA and unmodified mRNA, induced a significant (p
0.05) than the induced

310

upregulation after electroporation of modified mRNA and self-replicating mRNA.

311


Page 15 of 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


312 313

Figure 4. Gene regulation of 84 genes involved in innate immunity after intradermal

314

electroporation of 20 µg of the different vectors in pigs. Twenty-four hours after

315

administration of the vectors total RNA was isolated from the excised injection spots and the

316

expression of the different innate immune marker genes was measured relative to control (i.e.

317

intradermal electroporation of PBS). The heat map represents normalized mean expression

318

values depicted as log 2-fold change relative to control. Reported values were obtained from

319

three biopsies taken from three different pigs. Values indicated by a star* indicate a

320

significant difference (p < 0.05) compared to control (n = 3).

321



Page 16 of 26

322 323

Figure 5. Innate immune marker genes that were commonly upregulated by all three mRNA

324

vectors 24 h after intradermal electroporation in pigs. The graph shows the normalized mean

325

expression values of the indicated genes relative to control (i.e. intradermal electroporation of

326

PBS). Each bar represents mean ± standard deviation of three biopsies from three different

327

pigs. There were no significant differences between the different mRNA vectors.

328

Discussion

329

In this study, we compared the expression kinetics and intrinsic effect on the innate immunity

330

of three mRNA-based platforms and a state-of-the-art pDNA vector in pigs. Messenger RNA

331

based therapeutics have the potential to form a new class of drugs with a broad range of

332

possible applications. Especially in the field of vaccination, mRNA is very popular because of

333

its safety and its high transfection efficiency in non-dividing cells15. Additionally, mRNA

334

vaccines have a great flexibility with respect to production and application, enabling a fast

335

development of e.g. prophylactic vaccines against emerging diseases. Different mRNA

336

platforms have been developed allowing researchers to select the most suited mRNA platform

337

for their application32. Most preclinical studies with mRNA therapeutics have been performed

338

in mice. For pDNA therapeutics it is well-known that they have a much lower efficiency in 16 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 17 of 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


339

larger animals and humans than in mice, which makes translation of data obtained in mice to

340

humans difficult10,11,33,34. In this work, we evaluated different mRNA platforms in pigs. The

341

mRNAs were administered via intradermal injection. This route was chosen because of our

342

interest in mRNA vaccination. To prevent carrier related effects on the efficiency and

343

immunogenicity of the vectors we used electroporation to increase the intracellular delivery of

344

the mRNAs and pDNA.

345

In this study we found that the expression after intradermal electroporation of pDNA reaches

346

a maximum after one day and is followed by a sharp drop in expression at day 2. This drop

347

was unexpected as after intradermal electroporation of the same pDNA in mice we observed

348

that the pDNA reaches its maximal expression after about two days and stays on a high level

349

up to six days after administration (Supplementary Figure 2). This drop in pDNA expression

350

in pigs after day 1 might be attributed to epigenetic silencing. It is also surprising that one

351

day after administration pDNA and not the non-replicating mRNAs shows the highest

352

expression. Indeed, after delivery of pDNA in the cytosol it has the longest path to fulfil

353

before it becomes translated: it has to migrate to the nucleus where it gets transcribed into

354

mRNA and subsequently the mRNA must be transported to the cytosol where it is translated

355

into proteins.

356

The non-replicating mRNAs also reach their maximum one day after injection and

357

subsequently show a steady decrease in expression until day six. In mice similar drops in

358

expression that start 4 to 24h after carrier mediated delivery of non-replicating mRNAs have

359

been reported35-37. The group of Joachim Rädler determined that the intracellular half-life of

360

mRNA after intracellular delivery is about 11h. Taking into account that the half-life of firefly

361

luciferase is only a few hours

362

delivery nicely fits with this degradation kinetics of mRNA. An early drop in expression as

363

seen with the non-replicating mRNAs does occur after administration of the self-replicating

38,39

, the reported luciferase expression kinetics after mRNA



Page 18 of 26

364

mRNA. The capacity of the self-replicating mRNA to produce many subgenomic mRNA

365

copies in the cell enables this vector to maintain its protein production level during at least 12

366

days in the skin of pigs. However, this effect is only obtained when the highest dose (20 µg) is

367

used. In mice, only 1 µg of the same self-amplifying mRNA is needed to obtain such

368

sustained protein production, which indicates that mice are easier transfected with self-

369

replicating mRNA than pigs (Supplementary Figure 3). The self-replicating mRNA needs

370

some time before the subgenomic mRNA is abundantly produced in the second cycle of

371

replication. This causes a maximum expression around six days after injection as expected

372

taking into account previously reported expression profiles of replicating mRNAs in mice40.

373

Furthermore, when interpreting these data one must also take into account that, based on the

374

molecular weight, the number of self-replicating mRNA molecules per mass is about 4 times

375

lower than the number of non-replicating mRNA molecules and comparable to the number of

376

pDNA molecules. Taking into account this difference in copy number and the difference in

377

luciferase expression between self-amplifying mRNA, non-replicating mRNA and pDNA at

378

later time points (day 6 and 12) (Figure 1), we can conclude that the self-amplifying mRNA is

379

about 100, 40 and 4 times more effective on day 6 and 50, 30 and 5 times more effective on

380

day 12 than unmodified mRNA, modified mRNA and pDNA, respectively. We also need to

381

take into account that none of the differences between the expression kinetics of the different

382

vectors appeared to be significant. This is the result of the small number of pigs (4 or 5 per

383

experiment) in combination with high variability of the ex vivo bioluminescence signal. The

384

mean values and their standard errors of the individual data points shown in Figures 1, 2, 3

385

and means and the standard deviations of Figure 5 are displayed in Supplementary Table 1.

386

Therefore, we can only draw conclusions about predictive trends in expression kinetics.

387

Next, we compared the capacity of the synthetic mRNAs and pDNA to stimulate the innate

388

immune system by measuring transcriptional changes in innate immune responsive genes one 18 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 19 of 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


389

day after intradermal electroporation in pigs. An innate immune alarm might be

390

advantageous, as it can serve as a self-adjuvant, for mRNA based vaccines. However, for

391

protein-replacement therapies such innate immune response might diminish the protein

392

expression efficiency and promote an immune response against the therapeutic protein36. The

393

RT2 profiler PCR array demonstrated that self-amplifying, unmodified and modified mRNA,

394

but not pDNA, triggered an innate immune response after intradermal electroporation in pigs.

395

This is in accordance with previous studies in large animals and humans, showing poor

396

immunogenicity of DNA vaccines compared to their immunogenicity in small

397

animals10,11,33,34. Our results indicate a significantly higher expression of genes involved in

398

signaling downstream of toll-like receptors (IRF7, CCL5/RANTES, CD40), NOD-like

399

Receptors (CASP1, OAS2), RIG-1-Like receptors (DDX58/RIG-1, DHX58, IFIH1, ISG15,

400

IRF7) and type 1 Interferon signaling (MX1) for all tested mRNAs compared to control (i.e.

401

PBS plus electroporation). Signaling through these different pathways results in the activation

402

of e.g. type 1 interferon (IFN), tumor necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and caspase

403

1 activation. This creates a pro-inflammatory microenvironment that can ameliorate the

404

efficiency of mRNA vaccines1. Ishii et al. demonstrated that TANK-binding kinase-1 (TBK1)

405

plays an important role in the innate immune response after intramuscular electroporation of

406

pDNA vaccines in mice41. However, in our study intradermal electroporation of pDNA in pigs

407

causes a downregulation of TBK1. Also others found that stimulation of the IRF3 pathway

408

can result in a temporal decrease in TBK142. It has been described in the past that the

409

incorporation of modified nucleosides such as m1Ψ in mRNA can decrease the activation of

410

the innate immune system43. Therefore, we were surprised that also the m1Ψ modified mRNA

411

induced an upregulation of innate immune responsive genes19. Nevertheless, unmodified

412

mRNA induced the highest upregulation of the innate immune marker genes (Figure 4).

413

Interestingly, self-amplifying mRNA increased the innate immune responsive genes to a



Page 20 of 26

414

lesser extent than unmodified mRNA. One would expect the opposite as many uncompleted

415

mRNA strands are present during the self-amplification process. However, our self-

416

amplifying mRNA is based on the genome of a positive-strand RNA virus, which are known

417

to replicate in organelle-like structures, which prevents an exorbitant innate immune

418

response44. The upregulation of genes that signal downstream of toll-like receptors and the

419

weak upregulation of TLR3, 7 and 8 (Figure 4) was remarkable as one may expect that

420

mRNA does not encounter these endosomal TLRs after electroporation16. However, in recent

421

work it has been proposed that electroporation can also induce endocytosis (electro-

422

endocytosis)45. Therefore, it is possible that part of the electro-transferred mRNA uses the

423

classical endosomal trafficking pathway, and is recognized by TLRs residing in endosomes45.

424

In line with this reasoning, we would also expect an upregulation of TLR9 after

425

electroporation of pDNA as TLR9 recognizes unmethylated CpG motifs which are abundantly

426

present in the pGL4.13 plasmid (63 per 1000 bp). However, our data show that

427

electroporation of this pDNA did not cause a significant upregulation of TLR9 mRNA in pigs.

428

It has been reported by Hochrein et al. and Guzylack-Pirou et al. that pigs show a lower

429

response to CpG containing oligodeoxynucleotides compared to mice46,47. This may explain

430

the non-significant upregulation of TLR9 mRNA and the absence of a significant induction of

431

innate immune responsive genes after intradermal electroporation of pDNA in pigs. However,

432

another explanation of the lack of an innate immune response after intradermal

433

electroporation of pDNA in pigs in our study can also be due to the low dose (20µg pDNA

434

per 40kg, i.e. 0.5µg/kg). Indeed, a recent study in non-human primates showed that

435

intradermal electroporation of a HIV pDNA vaccine at a much higher dose of 22µg/kg

436

resulted in a significant, although moderate, induction of IL-1248

437

Finally, the production costs of therapeutic mRNAs will also be of importance for their

438

implementation in future applications. Production of mRNA on research scale is rather 20 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 21 of 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


439

expensive but the key to reduction of the production cost is upscaling of the production

440

process to an industrial level. The mandatory Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP)

441

regulations require product-specific validation. For mRNA however, the same production

442

process can be used for many different mRNA vaccines, bypassing the need for new

443

validation. This ensures production costs that are competitive with those of protein, peptide,

444

DNA, cell or recombinant pathogen based vaccines14. For vaccination purposes, an adequate

445

immune response is required to induce a memory immune response. Nucleotide modifications

446

have been shown to reduce this immune response by diminishing binding to TLRs, making

447

the modified mRNA maybe less suited for vaccination and more suited for example protein

448

replacement therapy. These modified nucleotides are more expensive compared to the

449

conventional ones. In our modified mRNA, the uridine was completely replaced by N1-

450

methylpseudouridine. Kormann et al., however, showed that a replacement of 25% is

451

sufficient to provoke a decrease of mRNA binding to pattern recognition receptors, what

452

would also lead to reduced production costs17.

453 454

Conclusions

455

Finally, to our knowledge, this is the first study in pigs where the intradermal translational

456

kinetics and the effect on the innate immune system of different synthetic mRNA-platforms

457

and pDNA were compared. In conclusion, our results show that mRNA modifications do not

458

completely prevent recognition by innate immune receptors in pigs, compared to previous

459

studies in mice16. This is probably due to the fact that we used silica columns and not a HPLC

460

based method (to remove double stranded mRNAs) for the purification of our mRNA.

461

Furthermore, synthetic mRNA, and specifically self-replicating mRNA, is a very promising

462

and a cost-effective DNA-alternative for the development of genetic therapeutics for use in

463

farm animals or humans14. In the future, mRNA based therapeutics may replace the current 21 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 22 of 26

464

commercial available DNA-based therapeutics in veterinary medicine like Oncept® (a DNA

465

cancer vaccine for dogs, Merial), Apex®-IHN (a DNA vaccine for fish, Vical), Clynav® (a

466

DNA vaccine for fish, Elanco) and LifeTide® SW 5 (a DNA vector for pigs encoding growth

467

hormone releasing hormone, VGX™ Animal Health)49.

468 469

Acknowledgements

470

We are grateful to Prof. dr. Frank Pasmans of the Department of Bacteriology, Pathology and

471

Avian Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, UGent, among other things for the use of the

472

CFX384 Bio-rad-cycler. Furthermore, the technical assistance of Sofie De Bruyckere

473

(Department of Bacteriology, Pathology and Avian Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine,

474

UGent) and Rudy Cooman (Department of Virology, Parasitology and Immunology, Faculty

475

of Veterinary Medicine, UGent) is greatly appreciated. The plasmids pTK160 and pTK305

476

were kind gifts from Tasuku Kitada and Ron Weiss (Massachusetts Institute of Technology,

477

USA). This work was supported by the concerted research action (GOA) fund of Ghent

478

University: Project Code BOF15/GOA/013.

479

Supporting Information

480

Supplementary figure 1: (A) Effect of storage temperature of skin biopsies on the ex vivo

481

bioluminescence signal. (B) Time-dependent evolution of the bioluminescence signal in the

482

skin biopsies.

483

Supplementary Figure 2: Luciferase expression kinetics after intradermal electroporation of

484

10 µg of pDNA in mice.

485

Supplementary Figure 3: Luciferase expression kinetics after intradermal electroporation of 1

486

µg of self-replicating mRNA in mice.


Page 23 of 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


487

Supplementary Table 1: Overview of the variance of the data displayed in Figures 1, 2, 3 and

488

5. Variance is displayed as standard error of the mean (SEM) of the bioluminescence signal

489

(p/s) for Figures 1-3 and standard deviation of the bioluminescence signal for Figure 5.

490

References

491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531

1 2

3 4 5 6 7

8

9

10

11

12

13 14

15

Sahin, U., Kariko, K. & Tureci, O. mRNA-based therapeutics--developing a new class of drugs. Nat Rev Drug Discov 13, 759-780, doi:10.1038/nrd4278 (2014). Steinle, H., Behring, A., Schlensak, C., Peter Wendel, H. & Avci-Adali, M. Application of in vitro transcribed messenger RNA for cellular engineering and reprogramming: Progress and challenges. Stem Cells, doi:10.1002/stem.2402 (2016). Wolff, J. A. et al. Direct gene transfer into mouse muscle in vivo. Science 247, 1465-1468 (1990). Pascolo, S. The messenger's great message for vaccination. Expert Rev Vaccines 14, 153-156, doi:10.1586/14760584.2015.1000871 (2015). Dupuis, M. et al. Distribution of DNA vaccines determines their immunogenicity after intramuscular injection in mice. J Immunol 165, 2850-2858 (2000). Krishnan, M. et al. Effects of epigenetic modulation on reporter gene expression: implications for stem cell imaging. FASEB J 20, 106-108, doi:10.1096/fj.05-4551fje (2006). Geall, A. J. et al. Nonviral delivery of self-amplifying RNA vaccines. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109, 14604-14609, doi:10.1073/pnas.1209367109 (2012). Deering, R. P., Kommareddy, S., Ulmer, J. B., Brito, L. A. & Geall, A. J. Nucleic acid vaccines: prospects for non-viral delivery of mRNA vaccines. Expert Opin Drug Deliv 11, 885-899, doi:10.1517/17425247.2014.901308 (2014). Denies, S., Cicchelero, L., Van Audenhove, I. & Sanders, N. N. Combination of interleukin-12 gene therapy, metronomic cyclophosphamide and DNA cancer vaccination directs all arms of the immune system towards tumor eradication. J Control Release 187, 175-182, doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2014.05.045 (2014). van Rooij, E. M. et al. Effect of vaccination route and composition of DNA vaccine on the induction of protective immunity against pseudorabies infection in pigs. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 66, 113-126 (1998). MacGregor, R. R. et al. First human trial of a DNA-based vaccine for treatment of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection: safety and host response. J Infect Dis 178, 92-100 (1998). Hacein-Bey-Abina, S. et al. A serious adverse event after successful gene therapy for X-linked severe combined immunodeficiency. N Engl J Med 348, 255-256, doi:10.1056/NEJM200301163480314 (2003). Zabner, J., Fasbender, A. J., Moninger, T., Poellinger, K. A. & Welsh, M. J. Cellular and molecular barriers to gene transfer by a cationic lipid. J Biol Chem 270, 18997-19007 (1995). Kallen, K. J. & Thess, A. A development that may evolve into a revolution in medicine: mRNA as the basis for novel, nucleotide-based vaccines and drugs. Ther Adv Vaccines 2, 10-31, doi:10.1177/2051013613508729 (2014). Van Tendeloo, V. F. et al. Highly efficient gene delivery by mRNA electroporation in human hematopoietic cells: superiority to lipofection and passive pulsing of mRNA and to electroporation of plasmid cDNA for tumor antigen loading of dendritic cells. Blood 98, 49-56 (2001).



532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581

16

17 18

19

20

21 22

23

24

25 26

27

28 29 30 31 32 33

34

Page 24 of 26

Andries, O. et al. Innate immune response and programmed cell death following carriermediated delivery of unmodified mRNA to respiratory cells. Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society 167, 157-166, doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2013.01.033 (2013). Kormann, M. S. et al. Expression of therapeutic proteins after delivery of chemically modified mRNA in mice. Nat Biotechnol 29, 154-157, doi:10.1038/nbt.1733 (2011). Nguyen, D. N. et al. Lipid-derived nanoparticles for immunostimulatory RNA adjuvant delivery. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109, E797-803, doi:10.1073/pnas.1121423109 (2012). Anderson, B. R. et al. Incorporation of pseudouridine into mRNA enhances translation by diminishing PKR activation. Nucleic acids research 38, 5884-5892, doi:10.1093/nar/gkq347 (2010). Kariko, K., Buckstein, M., Ni, H. & Weissman, D. Suppression of RNA recognition by Toll-like receptors: the impact of nucleoside modification and the evolutionary origin of RNA. Immunity 23, 165-175, doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2005.06.008 (2005). Lundstrom, K. Alphaviruses in gene therapy. Viruses 7, 2321-2333, doi:10.3390/v7052321 (2015). Pushko, P. et al. Replicon-helper systems from attenuated Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus: expression of heterologous genes in vitro and immunization against heterologous pathogens in vivo. Virology 239, 389-401, doi:10.1006/viro.1997.8878 (1997). Brazzoli, M. et al. Induction of Broad-Based Immunity and Protective Efficacy by Selfamplifying mRNA Vaccines Encoding Influenza Virus Hemagglutinin. J Virol 90, 332-344, doi:10.1128/JVI.01786-15 (2016). Bogers, W. M. et al. Potent immune responses in rhesus macaques induced by nonviral delivery of a self-amplifying RNA vaccine expressing HIV type 1 envelope with a cationic nanoemulsion. J Infect Dis 211, 947-955, doi:10.1093/infdis/jiu522 (2015). Li, J. et al. Messenger RNA vaccine based on recombinant MS2 virus-like particles against prostate cancer. Int J Cancer 134, 1683-1694, doi:10.1002/ijc.28482 (2014). Steitz, J., Britten, C. M., Wolfel, T. & Tuting, T. Effective induction of anti-melanoma immunity following genetic vaccination with synthetic mRNA coding for the fusion protein EGFP.TRP2. Cancer Immunol Immunother 55, 246-253, doi:10.1007/s00262-005-0042-5 (2006). Weiss, R., Scheiblhofer, S., Roesler, E., Weinberger, E. & Thalhamer, J. mRNA vaccination as a safe approach for specific protection from type I allergy. Expert Rev Vaccines 11, 55-67, doi:10.1586/erv.11.168 (2012). Tavernier, G. et al. mRNA as gene therapeutic: how to control protein expression. J Control Release 150, 238-247, doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2010.10.020 (2011). Brito, L. A. et al. A cationic nanoemulsion for the delivery of next-generation RNA vaccines. Mol Ther 22, 2118-2129, doi:10.1038/mt.2014.133 (2014). Debeer, S. et al. Comparative histology and immunohistochemistry of porcine versus human skin. Eur J Dermatol 23, 456-466, doi:10.1684/ejd.2013.2060 (2013). Andries, O. et al. Comparison of the gene transfer efficiency of mRNA/GL67 and pDNA/GL67 complexes in respiratory cells. Mol Pharm 9, 2136-2145, doi:10.1021/mp200604h (2012). Schlake, T., Thess, A., Fotin-Mleczek, M. & Kallen, K. J. Developing mRNA-vaccine technologies. RNA Biol 9, 1319-1330, doi:10.4161/rna.22269 (2012). Verfaillie, T. et al. Priming of piglets against enterotoxigenic E. coli F4 fimbriae by immunisation with FAEG DNA. Vaccine 22, 1640-1647, doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2003.09.045 (2004). Hirao, L. A. et al. Intradermal/subcutaneous immunization by electroporation improves plasmid vaccine delivery and potency in pigs and rhesus macaques. Vaccine 26, 440-448, doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2007.10.041 (2008).


Page 25 of 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620


35

36

37 38

39

40 41 42

43

44 45 46 47

48

49

Kariko, K., Muramatsu, H., Keller, J. M. & Weissman, D. Increased erythropoiesis in mice injected with submicrogram quantities of pseudouridine-containing mRNA encoding erythropoietin. Mol Ther 20, 948-953, doi:10.1038/mt.2012.7 (2012). Pardi, N. et al. Expression kinetics of nucleoside-modified mRNA delivered in lipid nanoparticles to mice by various routes. J Control Release 217, 345-351, doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2015.08.007 (2015). Oberli, M. A. et al. Lipid Nanoparticle Assisted mRNA Delivery for Potent Cancer Immunotherapy. Nano Lett 17, 1326-1335, doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.6b03329 (2017). Ignowski, J. M. & Schaffer, D. V. Kinetic analysis and modeling of firefly luciferase as a quantitative reporter gene in live mammalian cells. Biotechnol Bioeng 86, 827-834, doi:10.1002/bit.20059 (2004). Leclerc, G. M., Boockfor, F. R., Faught, W. J. & Frawley, L. S. Development of a destabilized firefly luciferase enzyme for measurement of gene expression. Biotechniques 29, 590-591, 594-596, 598 passim (2000). Ljungberg, K. & Liljestrom, P. Self-replicating alphavirus RNA vaccines. Expert Rev Vaccines 14, 177-194, doi:10.1586/14760584.2015.965690 (2015). Ishii, K. J. et al. TANK-binding kinase-1 delineates innate and adaptive immune responses to DNA vaccines. Nature 451, 725-729, doi:10.1038/nature06537 (2008). Zhao, Y. X., Tian, B., Edeh, C. B. & Brasier, A. R. Quantitation of the Dynamic Profiles of the Innate Immune Response Using Multiplex Selected Reaction Monitoring-Mass Spectrometry. Mol Cell Proteomics 12, 1513-1529, doi:10.1074/mcp.M112.023465 (2013). Kariko, K. et al. Incorporation of pseudouridine into mRNA yields superior nonimmunogenic vector with increased translational capacity and biological stability. Mol Ther 16, 1833-1840, doi:10.1038/mt.2008.200 (2008). Romero-Brey, I. & Bartenschlager, R. Membranous replication factories induced by plusstrand RNA viruses. Viruses 6, 2826-2857, doi:10.3390/v6072826 (2014). Rosazza, C., Meglic, S. H., Zumbusch, A., Rols, M. P. & Miklavcic, D. Gene Electrotransfer: A Mechanistic Perspective. Curr Gene Ther 16, 98-129 (2016). Hochrein, H. & Wagner, H. Of men, mice and pigs: looking at their plasmacytoid dendritic cells [corrected]. Immunology 112, 26-27, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2567.2004.01878.x (2004). Guzylack-Piriou, L., Balmelli, C., McCullough, K. C. & Summerfield, A. Type-A CpG oligonucleotides activate exclusively porcine natural interferon-producing cells to secrete interferon-alpha, tumour necrosis factor-alpha and interleukin-12. Immunology 112, 28-37, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2567.2004.01856.x (2004). Todorova, B. et al. Electroporation as a vaccine delivery system and a natural adjuvant to intradermal administration of plasmid DNA in macaques. Sci Rep 7, 4122, doi:10.1038/s41598-017-04547-2 (2017). Myhr, A. I. DNA Vaccines: Regulatory Considerations and Safety Aspects. Curr Issues Mol Biol 22, 79-88, doi:10.21775/cimb.022.079 (2016).

621



622

Abstract graphics

623

For table of contents use only.

624 625

Title: Comparison of the expression kinetics and immunostimulatory activity of replicating mRNA, non-replicating mRNA and pDNA after intradermal electroporation in pigs.

626 627

Authors: Bregje Leyman, Hanne Huysmans, Séan Mc Cafferty, Francis Combes, Eric Cox, Bert Devriendt, Niek N. Sanders

Page 26 of 26

628

629


Comparison of the Expression Kinetics and Immunostimulatory Activity

Recommend Documents