Next Article in Journal
Antiviral Effects of Clinically-Relevant Interferon-α and Ribavirin Regimens against Dengue Virus in the Hollow Fiber Infection Model (HFIM)
Next Article in Special Issue
Genetic Characterization and Phylogenetic Analysis of Small Ruminant Lentiviruses Detected in Spanish Assaf Sheep with Different Mammary Lesions
Previous Article in Journal
Understanding Oxidative Stress in Aedes during Chikungunya and Dengue Virus Infections Using Integromics Analysis
Previous Article in Special Issue
Absence of A3Z3-Related Hypermutations in the env and vif Proviral Genes in FIV Naturally Infected Cats
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Viruses
Volume 10
Issue 6
10.3390/v10060316
viruses-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Non-Primate Lentiviral Vectors and Their Applications in Gene Therapy for Ocular Disorders

by
Vincenzo Cavalieri
1,2,*,
Elena Baiamonte
3 and
Melania Lo Iacono
3
1
Department of Biological, Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences and Technologies (STEBICEF), University of Palermo, Viale delle Scienze Edificio 16, 90128 Palermo, Italy
2
Advanced Technologies Network (ATeN) Center, University of Palermo, Viale delle Scienze Edificio 18, 90128 Palermo, Italy
3
Campus of Haematology Franco e Piera Cutino, Villa Sofia-Cervello Hospital, 90146 Palermo, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Viruses 2018, 10(6), 316; https://doi.org/10.3390/v10060316
Submission received: 30 April 2018 / Revised: 6 June 2018 / Accepted: 7 June 2018 / Published: 9 June 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Nonprimate Lentivirus)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Lentiviruses have a number of molecular features in common, starting with the ability to integrate their genetic material into the genome of non-dividing infected cells. A peculiar property of non-primate lentiviruses consists in their incapability to infect and induce diseases in humans, thus providing the main rationale for deriving biologically safe lentiviral vectors for gene therapy applications. In this review, we first give an overview of non-primate lentiviruses, highlighting their common and distinctive molecular characteristics together with key concepts in the molecular biology of lentiviruses. We next examine the bioengineering strategies leading to the conversion of lentiviruses into recombinant lentiviral vectors, discussing their potential clinical applications in ophthalmological research. Finally, we highlight the invaluable role of animal organisms, including the emerging zebrafish model, in ocular gene therapy based on non-primate lentiviral vectors and in ophthalmology research and vision science in general.

1. Introduction to Non-Primate Lentiviruses

In the biomedical field of gene therapy, retroviridae-based vectors currently represent the most successful vehicles for delivery of functional gene units in vivo [1]. According to the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses [2], the Retroviridae family encompasses an ever-growing list of different species officially classified into two subfamilies, Orthoretrovirinae and Spumaretrovirinae, each including six and five genera, respectively. Lentiviruses are members of the Orthoretrovirinae subfamily, offering distinctive advantages for clinical applications: they can stably infect cells regardless of their proliferation status, showing no immunogenicity in vivo [3,4,5].
These viruses acquired their lenti (in Latin meaning slow) etymological prefix due to the protracted incubation period elapsing between the initial infection and the onset of the disease, usually lasting for months or even years.
Molecular phylogenetic studies coupled to virus–host specificity indicated that lentiviruses probably originated in non-primate mammals, and that they can be split into two major classes, viz primate and non-primate lentiviruses [6,7]. The former class includes viral species such as the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), while the non-primate lentiviral class comprehends the prototype visna-maedi virus (VMV), as well as the related caprine arthritis encephalitis virus (CAEV), the equine infectious anaemia virus (EIAV), the bovine immunodeficiency virus (BIV), and the more recently described feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) and Jembrana disease virus (JDV) (Table 1). By virtue of their marked genomic similarities, VMV and CAEV have been recently reassigned to a single quasi-species designated small ruminant lentiviruses (SRLVs) [8,9,10], while JDV is considered a subtype of BIV capable of specifically infecting Bali cattle [11,12].

2. Morphology and Genome Organization

The morphology and genome organization of all lentiviruses are similar in many aspects. The lentivirions have been described as slightly pleomorphic spherical-shaped particles with diameters of approximately 100 nm, containing a diploid genome that consists of two single-stranded positive-sense RNA molecules [25,26]. The viral genome is packaged by the nucleocapsid proteins and bound to the reverse transcriptase, integrase, and protease viral enzymes, forming an isometric core frequently shaped like a truncated cone. This internal structure is then encased in a proteinaceous shell formed by capsid proteins, and in turn surrounded by matrix proteins that interact with a lipid envelope. The envelope surface appears rough due to the presence of regularly dispersed projections of about 8 nm, which incorporate the two viral envelope transmembrane and surface glycoproteins.
The genome is organized from the 5′- to the 3′-end into a common modular structure consisting of the three primary gag, pol, and env genes. These genes encode the structural proteins providing the architecture of the virion, the reverse transcriptase/integrase/protease enzymes, and the envelope glycoproteins, respectively. Other genetic characteristics common in lentiviruses are some cis-regulatory sequences such as the RNA packaging signal required for genome encapsidation in virions [27], the polypurine tract required for reverse transcription [28], and the two long-terminal repeats [29].
A small set of accessory genes is differentially distributed among non-primate lentivirus species, and it accounts for most changes in molecular organization that differentiate them (Table 2).
These accessory genes are involved in the regulation of viral replication, assembly, and pathogenesis. Among them, the rev gene encodes a protein involved in nuclear export of viral genomic RNA [30]. Rev is the most functionally conserved accessory protein within non-primate lentivirus species, although the Rev protein of FIV bears a quite divergent non-consensus nuclear export signal [31,32].
All non-primate lentiviruses, except EIAV, contain the vif gene situated between pol and env. Though it is categorized as an accessory gene, vif encodes a protein that is required for viral infection and propagation, being involved in counteracting the antiviral activities of cellular APOBEC3 cytidine deaminases [33,34,35].
An additional pair of accessory genes consists of tat and orfS, both encoding regulatory proteins that serve to activate transcription of the lentiviral genome. More specifically, the former protein, which is related to the HIV homonym, acts as a strong transactivator by binding a stem-loop recognition element in the long terminal repeat (LTR) of EIAV, BIV, and JDV [36,37]. However, Tat proteins from SRLVs lack a transactivation function, while the FIV genome does not contain a tat gene at all [38,39]. Regarding the OrfS protein, which is called Orf2 in FIV, it is a weak activator of viral transcription that acts by binding to AP1 sites in the LTR of SRLVs and FIV [40,41,42].
Finally, there are also some accessory genes of currently undefined function. In particular, only BIV encodes the two small Vpy and Vpw proteins from the vif gene sequence [30,43], only BIV and JDV possess the tmx gene situated at the 3′-end of env [11,22], and only the EIAV contains the s2 gene in the central region of its genome [44,45].
Beyond the accessory genes, one notable difference between the two mentioned classes of viruses is that all non-primate lentiviruses, except the BIV/JDV lineage, contain a region of the pol gene encoding a deoxyuridine 5′-triphosphate nucleotidohydrolase (dUTPase), whereas the primate counterparts lack such a genetic trait [46]. It has been shown that dUTPase has a central role in facilitating productive viral replication in post-mitotic cells, possibly by minimizing misincorporation of potentially mutagenic dUTP into the proviral DNA [47,48]. The genome of the BIV/JDV viruses also possesses an insert in the same region of pol, but the sequence similarity is low compared to the primate counterparts, and the region seems to be no longer capable of encoding a functional dUTPase. However, despite the lack of catalytic activity, the encoded protein is critically required for BIV/JDV replication [49].

3. Life Cycle

The general lentivirus replication cycle starts with the engagement of a specific cellular receptor by the surface viral envelope glycoprotein. Target cell receptors for most of the non-primate lentiviruses remain to be determined. To date, all we know is that EIAV and FIV recognize two distinct members of the tumour necrosis factor receptor family [50,51], and that FIV requires the CXCR4 chemokine coreceptor [52,53].
Whatever the mechanism of ligand binding, the glycoprotein–receptor interaction determines the viral tropism towards specific cell types of the host, allowing the fusion between the cell and virus lipid membranes. This, in turn, results in the release of the viral core particle into the cytoplasm of the target cell, whereas the local dNTP concentration triggers the retro-transcription to cDNA of the viral genome [54]. Lentiviruses use a host cell tRNALys molecule to prime reverse transcription of each of the two genomic RNA copies [55,56]. While this process is running, it induces the reorganization of the viral core particle, with progressive shedding of capsid protein units. Next, the partially dismantled core particle is actively transported to the cell nucleus through a nuclear pore, and the virus cDNA becomes integrated into the host cell genome by means of the viral integrase enzyme. The integrated provirus will irreversibly persist in the cell throughout its life and it will be transmitted to daughter cells following mitosis. After integration, the host cell will use the RNA polymerase II transcription machinery to stably express the proviral genes from the 5′-LTR and to transcribe the full-length genomic RNA. Thus, progeny virus particles can be packaged and released out of the infected cell by budding at the plasma membrane, where newly synthesized viral envelope glycoprotein units have been previously incorporated.

4. From Non-Primate Lentivirus to Lentiviral Vector

The main goal that concerns development of a lentiviral vector is to remove unnecessary and potentially harmful sequences from the parental lentivirus genome, while conserving a high viral titer. Substantial advances in understanding of lentivirus life cycles and their various constituent proteins allowed the bioengineering of replication-deficient lentiviral expression vectors that maintain the favourable properties of parental viruses. In particular, lentiviral vectors retain the nuclear import mechanism that permits efficient transduction of non-dividing cells and are powerful vehicles for expressing different reporter and therapeutic constructs in dividing and non-dividing cells, as well as whole organisms. In this respect, delivery of transgene constructs may be directly in vivo or in cultured cells that are then transplanted in the individual body. Moreover, lentiviral vectors can be used when a permanent modification of the target cell is required because the integration process into the host genomic DNA provides stable expression of their transgene cargo [57].
Engineering of non-primate lentiviral expression systems capable to transduce a broad range of target cells followed the general design and state-of-the-art of the HIV-1 lentiviral vector technology [58]. The rationale of these protocols is to separate the cis-acting sequences involved in the transfer of the viral genome to target cells, from the sequences encoding the trans-acting viral proteins. This “split-genome” strategy results in at least three separate expression cassettes for the so-called transfer, packaging and envelope plasmids, respectively.
The transfer plasmid carries the transgene, which is generally under the transcriptional control of an internal promoter, the viral encapsidation signal for selective packaging of the transfer plasmid RNA, and the minimal elements necessary for reverse-transcription, cDNA integration, and nuclear export of the transfer plasmid RNA (such as the rev-responsive element, RRE). Additional elements derived from other viruses may also be incorporated in the transfer vector backbone to efficiently enhance transgene expression (for example, the internal promoter from cytomegalovirus, CMV, and post-transcriptional regulatory elements from woodchuck hepatitis virus, WPRE) or to allow simultaneous expression of two transgenes from a single internally promoted transcript (for example, the internal ribosomal entry site, IRES, from picornavirus) [59,60].
The packaging plasmid contains the gag and pol genes encoding both the structural and enzymatic proteins of the virion particle and may include the viral gene coding for the Rev protein, which is essential for post-transcriptional transport of the viral mRNAs from nucleus to cytoplasm. Finally, the envelope plasmid provides a heterologous glycoprotein derived from other enveloped viruses, in order to re-direct or expand tropism towards a wide range of cell types, and to increase the infectivity and stability of vector particles. Although glycoproteins from rabies virus, mokola virus, and gamma-retroviruses have been used, vesicular stomatitis virus glycoprotein (VSVG) remains, so far, the most widely used glycoprotein for pseudotyping of lentiviral vectors [61,62,63].
Importantly, during the lentiviral vector production process, the replication-defective viral particles produced are capable of transferring two copies of plus-stranded RNA encoding the transgene of interest to the target cell, but are limited to this single round of the infection process without spreading. Furthermore, the current minimal lentiviral vector systems lack all viral auxiliary genes that do not play important roles in viral transduction, since many of these genes have been shown to be detrimental to cell survival [64]. Altogether, these precautions minimize the possibility of a replication-competent lentivirus (RCL) being generated via recombination in vivo [65]. Such a possibility is highly unlikely because of multiple safety measures adopted during vector production: basically, all the components are supplied in trans, self-inactivating LTRs are used, and the plasmids used show limited regions of homology each other. However, the theoretical risk exists and an RCL assay is usually required to confirm the lack of any replicating virus prior to the vector being used clinically.
To date, almost all non-primate lentivirus species have been engineered into efficient lentiviral vectors following the protocol described above [66,67,68,69,70]. Regarding the RCL assay, in principle it is not strictly required for these particular vectors, since they would neither come in to contact with the wild type virus into a human, nor they could be spread in to the environment due to rapid inactivation by the complement system.
Historically, FIV has been the first engineered non-primate lentivirus, and it is still now considered an attractive alternative to the primate lentiviral vectors for gene therapy. In this regard, it should be emphasized that the highly restricted natural FIV tropism acts as a double-edged sword. On one side, it constitutes a potentially important biosafety feature for clinical application, since FIV does not infect humans despite extensive exposure [71,72,73]. On the other hand, it represents an obstacle for adapting FIV to gene transfer in human cells. Pseudotyping by the incorporation of heterologous envelope proteins into the FIV viral particle provided the opportunity to redirect the tropism towards different target cells and tissues. For example, the pantropic VSVG envelope protein allowed the preparation in human cells of FIV-derived vectors that efficiently transduce human, feline, and murine targets, showing minimal cytotoxicity [62,66,74]. However, pseudotyped FIV particles are still subject to innate antiviral restrictions put in place by the transduced cells. In particular, the TRIM5α (tripartite motif-containing 5 α) protein and its species-specific variants were found to account for a post-entry blocking activity by binding to viral capsid protein trimers and, in turn, disable the incoming viral particles prior to reverse transcription of the viral genome [75,76]. It follows that in gene therapy applications associated to very low multiplicity of infection such a post-entry restriction may drastically reduce the efficiency of FIV-derived vectors [77]. In this regard, titration of TRIM5α proteins could be accomplished by increasing the lentiviral vector dosage or by adding genome-less pseudotyped virus-like particles. On the other hand, the existence of the mentioned TRIM5α-dependent mechanism could provide an innate defence against systemic propagation of non-primate lentiviral particles that might theoretically arise in gene therapy. Another block to the completion of the wild-type FIV life cycle consists in the lack of long terminal repeat (LTR)-driven transcription in human cells. This drawback has been in large part overcome by replacing the U3 promoter region of the FIV LTR with a stronger enhancer/promoter [66,78], thereby bypassing the hazards of vector manufacturing in feline producer cells.
Soon after the development of FIV-based vectors, recombinant EIAV lentiviral vectors were engineered following the “split-genome” strategy described above [67,79]. The biosafety of this platform has been improved by engineering self-inactivating vectors in which part of the viral promoter situated in the LTR was deleted. In the latest generation of EIAV minimal vectors, the gag and pol genes have been codon-optimized, providing an additional safety advantage that makes homologous recombination highly improbable [80].

5. Non-Primate Lentiviral Vectors for Ocular Gene Therapy

Studies in the mammalian eye have used mainly three distinct viral vector systems to transfer foreign genes into post-mitotic retinal cells. Among these, adenoviral (AdV) vectors probably represent the third choice in order of importance, essentially because they usually mediate transient transgene expression and induce cell-mediated immune response [81,82]. Recombinant adeno-associated viral (AAV) vectors overcome these disadvantages, achieving efficient transduction of retinal ganglion cells and, to a lesser extent, photoreceptor cells [83,84]. In the former case, the transgene product undergoes anterograde axonal transport through the optic nerve, reaching the dendritic arbors at central target sites [84,85,86]. In the standpoint of gene therapy, this is certainly an adverse effect, since it could theoretically foretell dissemination of the viral particles over a long distance from the ocular district. However, an even bigger potential flaw of AAV vectors consists in the limited cloning capacity of less than 5 kb, which precludes cloning of large genes into a single viral particle [87]. Some efforts have been made towards increasing the cargo size of AAV vectors, both by the production of high-capacity AAV/AdV hybrid vectors and the improvement of trans-splicing technologies [88,89]. Nevertheless, lentiviral vectors currently continue to hold the broadest transgene-carrying capacity (of about 10–11 kb), which allows either delivery of large transgene constructs or co-delivery of multiple genes [90,91]. Such a strength, along with other facets discussed throughout this review, clearly indicates that lentiviral vectors represent a valuable system for gene transfer purposes.
In the chronology of ocular gene therapy, the first lentiviral vector evaluated was derived from the primate HIV lentivirus [92]. Although, as described, the possibility of generating replication-competent virus particles in a clinical trial from such a lentiviral vector is highly remote, psychological barriers in patients regarding use of HIV-based vectors could significantly hinder recruitment during clinical settings. Non-primate lentiviral vectors allowed to fully overcome this concern by virtue of their undoubted incapability of replicating in human cells. In addition, their relatively simple genome organization coupled to the above-mentioned transgene-carrying capacity facilitated vector development.
To date, the toxicity, biodistribution, and shedding characteristics of FIV-, BIV- and EIAV-derived vectors have been examined intra-ocularly by several studies (Table 3), and all of them coherently showed that these lentiviral vectors are safe, well tolerated, and localized to the site of administration in the eye. In this respect, the eye is an excellent target for gene therapy applications, essentially for two main reasons: it is easily accessed by standard injection of therapeutic lentiviral vectors, and it is isolated from the rest of the body via the blood–retina barrier. These features minimize any vector dissemination from the target ocular structures, thereby lowering the risk associated with potential side effects of treatment, such as insertional mutagenesis, in non-target cell types [93,94].
The distinct anatomically compartmentalized structures of the mammalian eye allow a multitude of vector administration routes, including intra-stromal, sub-conjunctival, peri-ocular, intra-cameral, intra-vitreal, and sub-retinal administration, altogether showing high variation in terms of lentiviral vector transduction. It has been also shown that choosing the appropriate vector administration route is highly influential in targeting specific cell types. For example, intra-vitreal delivery typically fails to achieve efficient transduction of retinal cells, possibly due to at least three known aspects. In brief, the intra-vitreally delivered lentiviral vector is diluted immediately on mixing with the vitreous humour and is situated outside the immune-privileged retinal compartment, being at increased risk for neutralization [117,118]. Moreover, the retinal internal limiting membrane and the posterior hyaloid face of the vitreous cortex act as physical barriers to vector diffusion across the eye subcompartments [119]. In contrast to intra-vitreal delivery, injection of VSVG-pseudotyped recombinant lentiviral vectors into the anterior chamber results in efficient and stable transduction of the corneal endothelium together with the trabecular meshwork. Sub-retinal injection instead appears to transduce cells of the retinal pigment epithelium along with neuronal and glial cells of the neuroretina to a variable extent. In this case, the distribution of transduced cells invariably remains focused mostly near the injection site [102,120]. Several findings obtained on different animal host species pointed out that this occurrence is not dependent on the degree of maturity of the retina, but rather relies upon direct lentiviral vector access to cells injured by the injection procedure [102,121]. In general, sub-retinal injection is the most used route of vector administration and it is currently used for human trials (see below).
Importantly, controlled comparison studies evaluating the ability of primate and non-primate-derived lentiviral vectors to transduce human and rabbit corneas, as well as human perfused eyes and subretinally-injected monkey eyes, established that FIV- and EIAV-based vectors are equivalently or even more efficacious, respectively, relative to HIV vectors [95,96,97,100]. Compelling evidence also showed that the high transduction aptitude of EIAV-based vectors extends to human corneal endothelial cells after the cryopreservation of ex vivo corneas, with no evidence of cellular dysfunction [104,122]. This finding is of prominent interest for future therapeutic application to treat corneal endothelial disorders. In fact, rather than use one cryopreserved cornea for a single recipient patient, EIAV-transduced and cultured endothelial cells could be theoretically transplanted as donors to multiple patients. In this regard, the advancements obtained during the last decade anticipate a revolutionary shift in the treatment of corneal diseases by means of the selective transplantation of components of the cornea instead of full-thickness keratoplasty, with improved recovery times and visual outcomes [123]. In light of this, transplantation of transduced endothelial cells could further implement a minimally invasive treatment with a lower risk of rejection than traditional corneal transplantation.
As evidenced throughout the specialized literature, bioengineering of non-primate lentiviral vectors involved the inclusion of distinct promoter sequences to direct appropriate transgene expression. In principle, adoption of a ubiquitous promoter, such as the cytomegalovirus immediate early gene promoter (CMV), should guarantee constitutively high and continuous transgene expression [124,125]. Contrary to this expectation, several studies highlighted that, following integration into the host cell genome, a given lentiviral transgene exhibits variegated expression and extinguishes its expression sooner or later [126,127,128]. Such a propensity for transgene silencing, termed the chromosomal position effect, reflects the not-permissive chromatin environment at the genomic insertion site, resulting in the spreading of heterochromatin into the vector sequences [129,130,131]. A growing body of evidence showed that specialized nucleoprotein complexes known as chromatin insulators can minimize chromosomal position effects when these regulatory elements are incorporated into the transferred unit [132,133,134,135,136]. Studying chromosomal position effects is extremely laborious, since it would require the establishment of a series of clonal lines each harbouring a single randomly integrated lentiviral vector, followed by the systematic mapping of each integration site, as well as the long-term vector expression in each cell clone. Although so far similar studies have not been carried out in the mammalian eye or in cells derived from ocular districts, the direct role of chromosomal position effects deserves to be better investigated in the future.
Tissue-specific promoters would be expected to be relatively weak compared to their constitutive counterparts, essentially due to the presence of cis-regulatory elements that preclude promoter activity in non-target cell types. Surprisingly, however, an effective increase in photoreceptor expression has been reported using HIV-based vectors in which the CMV promoter was substituted with the photoreceptor-specific rhodopsin promoter [92,137]. Similar results have been described following sub-retinal injection in mice of EIAV-based vectors bearing the GFP reporter under the control of photoreceptor-specific promoters in combination with an enhancer element isolated from the interphotoreceptor retinoid-binding protein gene [103]. A relevant clinical implication of these findings consists in maintaining high transgene expression levels, while hampering the possibility of undesirable transduction of non-target retinal cells at the site of lentiviral vector administration.

6. Most Recent Advancements and Future Directions

For the variety of reasons explained in the previous section, all of the lentiviral vectors standing at the forefront of gene therapy in ophthalmology are based on EIAV. Currently there are three clinical trials that use EIAV lentiviral vectors (namely Stargen, Ushstat, and Retinostat) for treatment of distinct eye diseases (Table 3). StarGen contains the wild type ABCA4 gene, which encodes for a photoreceptor-specific member of the ABC transporter family [112,138,139]. In the worldwide population, ABCA4 is susceptible to frequent mutations that cause the juvenile cone-rod dystrophy called Stargardt disease [140,141]. Although ABCA4 is a quite large and complex gene, the corresponding ABCA4 cDNA, of about 7 kb, has been comfortably cloned into the StarGen vector, which efficiently corrected the disease phenotype in ABCA4−/− knockout mice [107]. More recently, a GLP toxicology study described subretinal injection in rabbits and macaques of a StarGen reporter vector, providing additional encouraging elements for utilization of this non-primate lentiviral vector to treat patients affected by Stargardt disease [112].
UshStat vector has been obtained by cloning the human myosin VIIa gene, encoding a non-conventional myosin motor protein, under the control of the CMV promoter in an EIAV-based vector [115]. Mutations in the mentioned gene are commonly associated with the onset of the retinal degenerative disease named Usher syndrome type IB [142]. The potential of UshStat for gene therapy purpose has been recently supported by functional restoration of phenotype in the shaker1 mouse model of Usher syndrome, following subretinal administration of UshStat [115]. Importantly, both StarGen and UshStat vectors have been licensed to Sanofi and are SAR422459 and SAR421869, respectively.
Last, but not least, RetinoStat has been developed to tackle retinal neovascularization, which is associated to the age-related macular degeneration. Neovascularization is quenched physiologically by the angiostatic proteins expressed during the process of normal wound healing [143]. Based on this concept, RetinoStat contains two potently angiostatic genes, endostatin and angiostatin [111]. When subretinally injected in mice, rabbits, and macaques, RetinoStat efficiently abolished the retinal blood vessel proliferation [102,108,111]. This evidence opened the way for the first phase I clinical trial testing the safety of subretinal injection of a non-primate lentiviral vector in patients affected by neovascular age-related macular degeneration [116]. This study confirmed that not only RetinoStat provides robust and sustained expression of the bicistronic transgene, but it also helps to reduce the excess fluid characteristically residing in the neural retina of sick patients [116].
A complementary non-primate lentiviral platform, named EncorStat, has been more recently developed to minimize corneal neovascularization, which represents the most important risk factor for rejection following corneal transplantation [144]. To this purpose, the bicistronic organization of EncorStat allows the delivery of the same two angiostatic proteins synthesized by Retinostat [113]. Worth mentioning, rabbit corneas incubated with EncorStat before surgery significantly suppressed neovascularization in a rabbit model of corneal rejection, favouring the improvement of an ex vivo therapeutic protocol [113].
RetinoStat and EncorStat are only two recent examples testifying that the carrying capacity of lentiviral vectors may permit co-delivery of multiple genes. This aspect is of relevant interest for future clinical application, since it could facilitate multifaceted targeting of eye disorders with potentially greater therapeutic effects than single gene delivery approaches. Furthermore, beneficial outcomes could be extended to cell types not directly transduced by lentiviral vectors if, for example, a paracrine effect could be attained by a sufficient amount of a therapeutic protein secreted by adjacent transduced cells.
Beyond speculative aspects about possible future application of non-primate lentiviral vectors, all the studies described in this section allow to outline two general points: (1) most ocular diseases actually lack effective gene therapies, and (2) there is a major need for animal models that closely mirror the human eye pathologies. Although relevant information on the latter issue can be obtained from human epidemiological studies, the use of suitable animal models is critical in identifying risk factors for a given ocular disease. In addition, animal models represent the most commonly used experimental tool to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the basic molecular mechanisms that drive disease progression, also paving the way for evaluation of the biosafety and efficacy of therapies, including those based on the use of non-primate lentiviruses. In the last decades, multiple animal models mimicking eye diseases have been developed, each of them owning unique peculiar features [145]. Rodents, such as mice and rabbits, have been and probably will continue to be the most commonly used mammalian models for vision research, due to the fact that they are relatively easy to house and manipulate. However, the visual systems of rodents lack some anatomical and functional features found in humans: for example, they do not have a macula [146], the region of fine visual discrimination affected by human retinal neovascular diseases [147,148].
Using of non-human primates for screening to detect potential therapeutics allows overcoming this problem, with more direct relevance to human conditions. On the other hand, the value of employing primates in scientific research must be carefully evaluated due to challenging expense and the necessity for highly specialized personnel and equipment. In fact, it is often preferable to perform pilot experiments in evolutionary simpler organisms before making the pivotal studies in non-human primates. In this respect, zebrafish (Danio rerio) recently emerged as a powerful model system for studying ophthalmological disorders and for developing potential therapies to combat them. The strength of zebrafish lies primarily in the fact that the fish’s visual system mirrors the human anatomical and functional situation better compared with other animal models. Indeed, contrary to mice that have rod-dominated vision, both zebrafish and humans have cone-dominant vision and comparable cone density [149,150,151]. Several human ocular diseases affecting, among others, the corneal endothelium, lens, photoreceptors, and retinal vasculature, have already been modelled in zebrafish [152,153,154,155,156]. Compared to other animal models, zebrafish can be maintained relatively cheaply in laboratory, and have high fecundity as well as a short life cycle, allowing rapidity and high statistical power for downstream experimental procedures [157]. Furthermore, intra-vitreal and/or retro-orbital injection could be performed easily in the zebrafish eye to deliver therapeutic vectors or heterologous cells transduced ex vivo. By virtue of all these strengths, it could be reasonably anticipated that the zebrafish model will play a central role in future research on different aspects of ophthalmology and vision science, including the use of non-primate lentiviral vectors for gene therapy.

Author Contributions

V.C. was the major contributor in reviewing the literature and in conceiving and writing the manuscript. E.B. and M.L.I. participated in writing during the final stage of manuscript preparation. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by a grant from the Italian Ministry of Health (Progetto di Rete Ricerca Finalizzata, grant number NET-2016-02363765) to V.C., and by Fondazione Franco e Piera Cutino.

Acknowledgments

We warmly thanks Santina Acuto for fruitful discussions about the bioengineering of lentiviral vectors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Sakuma, T.; Barry, M.A.; Ikeda, Y. Lentiviral vectors: Basic to translational. Biochem. J. 2012, 443, 603–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses. Available online: https://talk.ictvonline.org (accessed on 1 April 2018).
  3. Lewis, P.; Hensel, M.; Emerman, M. Human immunodeficiency virus infection of cells arrested in the cell cycle. EMBO J. 1992, 11, 3053–3058. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  4. Lewis, P.F.; Emerman, M. Passage through mitosis is required for oncoretroviruses but not for the human immunodeficiency virus. J. Virol. 1994, 68, 510–516. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  5. Fouchier, R.A.M.; Meyer, B.E.; Simon, J.H.M.; Fischer, U.; Malim, M.H. HIV-1 infection of non-dividing cells: Evidence that the amino-terminal basic region of the viral matrix protein is important for Gag processing but not for post-entry nuclear import. EMBO J. 1997, 16, 4531–4539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Herniou, E.; Martin, J.; Miller, K.; Cook, J.; Wilkinson, M.; Tristem, M. Retroviral diversity and distribution in vertebrates. J. Virol. 1998, 72, 5955–5966. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  7. Gifford, R.J. Viral evolution in deep time: Lentiviruses and mammals. Trends Genet. 2012, 28, 89–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Leroux, C.; Chastang, J.; Greenland, T.; Mornex, J.F. Genomic heterogeneity of small ruminant lentiviruses: Existence of heterogeneous populations in sheep and of the same lentiviral genotypes in sheep and goats. Arch. Virol. 1997, 142, 1125–1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Pisoni, G.; Quasso, A.; Moroni, P. Phylogenetic analysis of small-ruminant lentivirus subtype B1 in mixed flocks: Evidence for natural transmission from goats to sheep. Virology 2005, 339, 147–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Pisoni, G.; Bertoni, G.; Boettcher, P.; Ponti, W.; Moroni, P. Phylogenetic analysis of the gag region encoding the matrix protein of small ruminant lentiviruses: Comparative analysis and molecular epidemiological applications. Virus Res. 2006, 116, 159–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Chadwick, B.J.; Coelen, R.J.; Wilcox, G.E.; Sammels, L.M.; Kertayadnya, G. Nucleotide sequence analysis of Jembrana disease virus: A bovine lentivirus associated with an acute disease syndrome. J. Gen. Virol. 1995, 76, 1637–1650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Desport, M.; Lewis, J. Jembrana disease virus: Host responses, viral dynamics and disease control. Curr. HIV Res. 2010, 8, 53–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Thormar, H. The growth cycle of visna virus in monolayer cultures of sheep cells. Virology 1963, 19, 273–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Narayan, O.; Silverstein, A.M.; Price, D.; Johnson, R.T. Visna virus infection of American lambs. Science 1974, 183, 1202–1203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Crawford, T.B.; Adams, D.S.; Cheevers, W.P.; Cork, L.C. Chronic arthritis in goats caused by a retrovirus. Science 1980, 207, 997–999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Cheevers, W.P.; Roberson, S.; Klevjer-Anderson, P.; Crawford, T.B. Characterization of caprine arthritis-encephalitis virus: A retrovirus of goats. Arch. Virol. 1981, 67, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Reagan, R.L.; Lillie, M.G.; Hickman, J.W.; Brueckner, A.L. Studies of the virus of equine infectious anemia. Am. J. Vet. Res. 1950, 11, 157–158. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  18. Charman, H.P.; Bladen, S.; Gilden, R.V.; Coggins, L. Equine infectious anemia virus: Evidence favoring classification as a retravirus. J. Virol. 1976, 19, 1073–1079. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  19. Pedersen, N.C.; Ho, E.W.; Brown, M.L.; Yamamoto, J.K. Isolation of a T-lymphotropic virus from domestic cats with an immunodeficiency-like syndrome. Science 1987, 235, 790–793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Olmsted, R.A.; Barnes, A.K.; Yamamoto, J.K.; Hirsch, V.M.; Purcell, R.H.; Johnson, P.R. Molecular cloning of feline immunodeficiency virus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1989, 86, 2448–2452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Van Der Maaten, M.J.; Boothe, A.D.; Seger, C.L. Isolation of a Virus from Cattle with Persistent Lymphocytosis. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1972, 49, 1649–1657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Gonda, M.A.; Braun, M.J.; Carter, S.G.; Kost, T.A.; Bess, J.W., Jr.; Arthur, L.O.; Van der Maaten, M.J. Characterization and molecular cloning of a bovine lentivirus related to human immunodeficiency virus. Nature 1987, 330, 388–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Kertayadnya, G.; Wilcox, G.E.; Soeharsono, S.; Hartaningsih, N.; Coelen, R.J.; Cook, R.D.; Collins, M.E.; Brownlie, J. Characteristics of a retrovirus associated with Jembrana disease in Bali cattle. J. Gen. Virol. 1993, 74, 1765–1778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Chadwick, B.J.; Coelen, R.J.; Sammels, L.M.; Kertayadnya, G.; Wilcox, G.E. Genomic sequence analysis identifies Jembrana disease virus as a new bovine lentivirus. J. Gen. Virol. 1995, 76, 189–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Frankel, A.D.; Young, J.A.T. HIV-1: Fifteen proteins and an RNA. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 1998, 67, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Vogt, V.M.; Simon, M.N. Mass determination of Rous sarcoma virus virions by scanning transmission electron microscopy. J. Virol. 1999, 73, 7050–7055. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  27. Watanabe, S.; Temin, H.M. Encapsidation sequences for spleen necrosis virus, an avian retrovirus, are between the 5’ long terminal repeat and the start of the gag gene. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci USA 1982, 79, 5986–5990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. VandenDriessche, T.; Thorrez, L.; Naldini; Follenzi, A.; Moons, L.; Berneman, Z.; Collen, D.; Chuah, M.K.L. Lentiviral vectors containing the human immunodeficiency virus type-1 central polypurine tract can efficiently transduce nondividing hepatocytes and antigen-presenting cells in vivo. Blood 2002, 100, 813–822. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  29. Frech, K.; Brack-Werner, R.; Werner, T. Common modular structure of lentivirus LTRs. Virology 1996, 224, 256–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. St-Louis, M.C.; Cojocariu, M.; Archambault, D. The molecular biology of bovine immunodeficiency virus: A comparison with other lentiviruses. Anim. Health Res. Rev. 2004, 5, 125–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Phillips, T.R.; Lamont, C.; Konings, D.A.; Shacklett, B.L.; Hamson, C.A.; Luciw, P.A.; Elder, J.H. Identification of the Rev transactivation and Rev-responsive elements of feline immunodeficiency virus. J. Virol. 1992, 66, 5464–5471. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  32. Tomonaga, K.; Shin, Y.S.; Fukasawa, M.; Miyazawa, T.; Adachi, A.; Mikami, T. Feline immunodeficiency virus gene expression: Analysis of the RNA splicing pattern and the monocistronic rev mRNA. J. Gen. Virol. 1993, 74, 2409–2417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. LaRue, R.S.; Andresdottir, V.; Blanchard, Y.; Conticello, S.G.; Derse, D.; Emerman, M.; Greene, W.C.; Jonsson, S.R.; Landau, N.R.; Löchelt, M.; et al. Guidelines for naming nonprimate APOBEC3 genes and proteins. J. Virol. 2009, 83, 494–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Desimmie, B.A.; Delviks-Frankenberrry, K.A.; Burdick, R.C.; Qi, D.; Izumi, T.; Pathak, V.K. Multiple APOBEC3 restriction factors for HIV-1 and one Vif to rule them all. J. Mol. Biol. 2014, 426, 1220–1245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Zhang, Z.; Gu, Q.; Jaguva Vasudevan, A.A.; Hain, A.; Kloke, B.P.; Hasheminasab, S.; Mulnaes, D.; Sato, K.; Cichutek, K.; Häussinger, D.; et al. Determinants of FIV and HIV Vif sensitivity of feline APOBEC3 restriction factors. Retrovirology 2016, 13, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Barboric, M.; Taube, R.; Nekrep, N.; Fujinaga, K.; Peterlin, B.M. Binding of Tat to TAR and recruitment of positive transcription elongation factor b occur independently in bovine immunodeficiency virus. J. Virol. 2000, 74, 6039–6044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Southgate, C.D.; Green, M.R. Delineating minimal protein domains and promoter elements for transcriptional activation by lentivirus Tat proteins. J. Virol. 1995, 69, 2605–2610. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  38. Villet, S.; Faure, C.; Bouzar, B.A.; Morin, T.; Verdier, G.; Chebloune, Y.; Legras, C. Lack of transactivation function for maedi Visna virus and Caprine arthritis encephalitis virus Tat proteins. Virology 2003, 307, 317–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Villet, S.; Bouzar, B.A.; Morin, T.; Verdier, G.; Legras, C.; Chebloune, Y. Maedi Visna virus and Caprine arthritis encephalitis virus genomes encode a Vpr-like but no Tat protein. J. Virol. 2003, 77, 9632–9638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Sparger, E.E.; Shacklett, B.L.; Renshaw-Gegg, L.; Barry, P.A.; Pedersen, N.C.; Elder, J.H.; Luciw, P.A. Regulation of gene expression directed by the long terminal repeat of the feline immunodeficiency virus. Virology 1992, 187, 165–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Waters, A.K.; De Parseval, A.P.; Lerner, D.L.; Neil, J.C.; Thompson, F.J.; Elder, J.H. Influence of ORF2 on host cell tropism of feline immunodeficiency virus. Virology 1996, 215, 10–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. De Parseval, A.; Elder, J.H. Demonstration that orf2 encodes the feline immunodeficiency virus transactivating (Tat) protein and characterization of a unique gene product with partial rev activity. J. Virol. 1999, 73, 608–617. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  43. Garvey, K.J.; Oberste, M.S.; Elser, J.E.; Braun, M.J.; Gonda, M.A. Nucleotide sequence and genome organization of biologically active proviruses of the bovine immunodeficiency-like virus. Virology 1990, 175, 391–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Fagerness, A.J.; Flaherty, M.T.; Perry, S.T.; Jia, B.; Payne, S.L.; Fuller, F.J. The S2 accessory gene of equine infectious anemia virus is essential for expression of disease in ponies. Virology 2006, 349, 22–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Li, F.; Puffer, B.A.; Montelaro, R.C. The S2 gene of equine infectious anemia virus is dispensable for viral replication in vitro. J. Virol. 1998, 72, 8344–8348. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  46. Elder, J.H.; Lerner, D.L.; Hasselkus-Light, C.S.; Fontenot, D.J.; Hunter, E.; Luciw, P.A.; Montelaro, R.C.; Phillips, T.R. Distinct subsets of retroviruses encode dUTPase. J. Virol. 1992, 66, 1791–1794. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  47. Payne, S.L.; Elder, J.H. The role of retroviral dUTPases in replication and virulence. Curr. Protein Pept. Sci. 2001, 2, 381–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Hizi, A.; Herzig, E. dUTPase: The frequently overlooked enzyme encoded by many retroviruses. Retrovirology 2015, 12, 70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Voronin, N.; Herzig, E.; Hizi, A. The dUTPase-related gene of bovine immunodeficiency virus is critical for viral replication, despite the lack of dUTPase activity of the encoded protein. Retrovirology 2014, 12, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Zhang, B.; Jin, S.; Jin, J.; Li, F.; Montelaro, R.C. A tumor necrosis factor receptor family protein serves as a cellular receptor for the macrophage-tropic equine lentivirus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2005, 102, 9918–9923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  51. Shimojima, M.; Miyazawa, T.; Ikeda, Y.; McMonagle, E.L.; Haining, H.; Akashi, H. Takeuchi, Y.; Hosie, M.J.; Willett, B.J. Use of CD134 as a primary receptor by the feline immunodeficiency virus. Science 2004, 303, 1192–1195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Poeschla, E.; Looney, D. CXCR4 is required by a non-primate lentivirus: Heterologous expression of feline immunodeficiency virus in human, rodent and feline cells. J. Virol. 1998, 72, 6858–6866. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  53. Willett, B.J.; Picard, L.; Hosie, M.J.; Turner, J.D.; Adema, K.; Clapham, P.R. Shared usage of the chemokine receptor CXCR4 by the feline and human immunodeficiency viruses. J. Virol. 1997, 71, 6407–6415. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  54. Gilboa, E.; Mitra, S.W.; Goff, S.; Baltimore, D. A detailed model of reverse transcription and tests of crucial aspects. Cell 1979, 18, 93–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Mak, J.; Kleiman, L. Primer tRNAs for reverse transcription. J. Virol. 1997, 71, 8087–8095. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  56. Kleiman, L.; Christopher, P.; Jones, C.P.; Musier-Forsyth, K. Formation of the tRNALys packaging complex in HIV-1. FEBS Lett. 2010, 584, 359–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Naldini, L.; Blomer, U.; Gallay, P.; Ory, D.; Mulligan, R.; Gage, F.H.; Verma, I.M.; Trono, D. In vivo gene delivery and stable transduction of nondividing cells by a lentiviral vector. Science 1996, 272, 263–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Naldini, L. Lentiviruses as gene transfer agents for delivery to non-dividing cells. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 1998, 272, 457–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Donello, J.E.; Loeb, J.E.; Hope, T.J. Woodchuck hepatitis virus contains a tripartite posttranscriptional regulatory element. J. Virol. 1998, 72, 5085–5092. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  60. Zufferey, R.; Donello, J.E. Woodchuck hepatitis virus posttranscriptional regulatory element enhances expression of transgenes delivered by retroviral vectors. J. Virol. 1999, 73, 2886–2892. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  61. Burns, J.C.; Friedmann, T.; Driever, W.; Burrascano, M.; Yee, J.K. Vesicular stomatitis virus G glycoprotein pseudotyped retroviral vectors: Concentration to very high titer and efficient gene transfer into mammalian and nonmammalian cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1993, 90, 8033–8037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Yee, J.K.; Friedman, T.; Burns, J.C. Generation of high-titer pseudotyped retroviral vectors with very broad host range. Methods Cell. Biol. 1994, 43, 99–112. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  63. Cronin, J.; Zhang, X.Y.; Reiser, J. Altering the tropism of lentiviral vectors through pseudotyping. Curr. Gene Ther. 2005, 5, 387–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Chang, L.J.; Gay, E.E. The molecular genetics of lentiviral vectors—Current and future perspectives. Curr. Gene Ther. 2001, 1, 237–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Zufferey, R.; Dull, T.; Mandel, R.J.; Bukovsky, A.; Quiroz, D.; Naldini, L.; Trono, D. Self-inactivating lentivirus vector for safe and efficient in vivo gene delivery. J. Virol. 1998, 72, 9873–9880. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  66. Poeschla, E.M.; Wong-Staal, F.; Looney, D.J. Efficient transduction of nondividing human cells by feline immunodeficiency virus lentiviral vectors. Nat. Med. 1998, 4, 354–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Olsen, J.C. Gene transfer vectors derived from equine infectious anemia virus. Gene Ther. 1998, 5, 1481–1487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  68. Berkowitz, R.; Ilves, H.; Lin, W.Y.; Eckert, K.; Coward, A.; Tamaki, S.; Veres, G.; Plavec, I. Construction and molecular analysis of gene transfer systems derived from bovine immunodeficiency virus. J. Virol. 2001, 75, 3371–3382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Berkowitz, R.D.; Ilves, H.; Plavec, I.; Veres, G. Gene transfer systems derived from Visna virus: Analysis of virus production and infectivity. Virology 2001, 279, 116–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Mselli-Lakhal, L.; Favier, C.; Da Silva Teixeira, M.F.; Chettab, K.; Legras, C.; Ronfort, C.; Verdier, G.; Mornex, J.F.; Chebloune, Y. Defective RNA packaging is responsible for low transduction efficiency of CAEV-based vectors. Arch. Virol. 1998, 143, 681–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Lutz, H. Feline retroviruses: A brief review. Vet. Microbiol. 1990, 23, 131–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Nowotny, N.; Uthman, A.; Haas, O.A.; Borkhardt, A.; Lechner, K.; Egberink, H.F.; Möstl, K.; Horzinek, M.C. Is it possible to catch leukemia from a cat? Lancet 1995, 46, 252–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Yamamoto, J.K.; Hansen, H.; Ho, E.W.; Morishita, T.Y.; Okuda, T.; Sawa, T.R.; Nakamura, R.M.; Pedersen, N.C. Epidemiologic and clinical aspects of feline immunodeficiency virus infection in cats from the continental United States and Canada and possible mode of transmission. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 1989, 194, 213–220. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  74. Song, J.J.; Lee, B.; Chang, J.W.; Kim, J.H.; Kwon, Y.K.; Lee, H. Optimization of vesicular stomatitis virus-G pseudotyped feline immunodeficiency virus vector for minimized cytotoxicity with efficient gene transfer. Virus Res. 2003, 93, 25–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Stremlau, M.; Owens, C.M.; Perron, M.J.; Kiessling, M.; Autissier, P.; Sodroski, J. The cytoplasmic body component TRIM5alpha restricts HIV-1 infection in Old World monkeys. Nature 2004, 427, 848–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Hatziioannou, T.; Perez-Caballero, D.; Yang, A.; Cowan, S.; Bieniasz, P.D. Retrovirus resistance factors Ref1 and Lv1 are species-specific variants of TRIM5alpha. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2004, 101, 10774–10779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Saenz, D.T.; Teo, W.; Olsen, J.C.; Poeschla, E. Restriction of Feline Immunodeficiency Virus by Ref1, LV1 and Primate TRIM5a Proteins. J. Virol. 2005, 79, 15175–15188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Curran, M.A.; Kaiser, S.M.; Achacoso, P.L.; Nolan, G.P. Efficient transduction of nondividing cells by optimized feline immunodeficiency virus vectors. Mol. Ther. 2000, 1, 31–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Mitrophanous, K.; Yoon, S.; Rohll, J.; Patil, D.; Wilkes, F.; Kim, V.; Kingsman, S.; Kingsman, A.; Mazarakis, N. Stable gene transfer to the nervous system using a non-primate lentiviral vector. Gene Ther. 1999, 6, 1808–1818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  80. Rohll, J.B.; Mitrophanous, K.A.; Martin-Rendon, E.; Ellard, F.M.; Radcliffe, P.A.; Mazarakis, N.D.; Kingsman, M. Design, production, safety, evaluation, and clinical applications of nonprimate lentiviral vectors. Methods Enzymol. 2002, 346, 466–500. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  81. Hoffman, L.M.; Maguire, A.M.; Bennett, J. Cell-mediated immune response and stability of intraocular transgene expression after adenovirus-mediated delivery. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 1997, 38, 2224–2233. [Google Scholar]
  82. Reichel, M.B.; Ali, R.R.; Thrasher, A.J.; Hunt, D.M.; Bhattacharya, S.S.; Baker, D. Immune responses limit adenovirally mediated gene expression in the adult mouse eye. Gene Ther. 1998, 5, 1038–1046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  83. Flannery, J.G.; Zolotukhin, S.; Vaquero, M.I.; LaVail, M.M.; Muzyczka, N.; Hauswirth, W.W. Efficient photoreceptor-targeted gene expression in vivo by recombinant adeno-associated virus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1997, 94, 6916–6921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  84. Harvey, A.R.; Kamphuis, W.; Eggers, R.; Symons, N.A.; Blits, B.; Niclou, S.; Boer, G.J.; Verhaagen, J. Intravitreal injection of adeno-associated viral vectors results in the transduction of different types of retinal neurons in neonatal and adult rats: A comparison with lentiviral vectors. Mol. Cell. Neurosci. 2002, 21, 141–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Chamberlin, N.L.; Du, B.; de Lacalle, S.; Saper, C.B. Recombinant adeno-associated virus vector: Use for transgene expression and anterograde tract tracing in the CNS. Brain Res. 1998, 793, 169–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Van den Pol, A.N.; Ghosh, P.K. Selective neuronal expression of green fluorescent protein with cytomegalovirus promoter reveals entire neuronal arbor in transgenic mice. J. Neurosci. 1998, 18, 10640–10651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Dong, J.Y.; Fan, P.D.; Frizzell, R.A. Quantitative analysis of the packaging capacity of recombinant adeno-associated virus. Hum. Gene Ther. 1996, 7, 2101–2112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Yan, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Duan, D.; Engelhardt, J.F. Trans-splicing vectors expand the utility of adeno-associated virus for gene therapy. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2000, 97, 6716–6721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  89. Gonçalves, M.A.; van der Velde, I.; Knaän-Shanzer, S.; Valerio, D.; de Vries, A.A. Stable transduction of large DNA by high-capacity adeno-associated virus/adenovirus hybrid vectors. Virology 2004, 321, 287–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Counsell, J.R.; Asgarian, Z.; Meng, J.; Ferrer, V.; Vink, C.A.; Howe, S.J.; Waddington, S.N.; Thrasher, A.J.; Muntoni, F.; Morgan, J.E.; et al. Lentiviral vectors can be used for full-length dystrophin gene therapy. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Greenberg, K.P.; Lee, E.S.; Schaffer, D.V.; Flannery, J.G. Gene delivery to the retina using lentiviral vectors. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 2006, 572, 255–266. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  92. Miyoshi, H.; Takahashi, M.; Gage, F.H.; Verma, I.M. Stable and efficient gene transfer into the retina using an HIV-based lentiviral vector. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1997, 94, 10319–10323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  93. Zhou, R.; Caspi, R.R. Ocular immune privilege. F1000 Biol. Rep. 2010, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  94. Lipinski, D.M.; Thake, M.; MacLaren, R.E. Clinical applications of retinal gene therapy. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2013, 32, 22–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Loewen, N.; Fautsch, M.P.; Peretz, M.; Bahler, C.K.; Cameron, J.D.; Johnson, D.H.; Poeschla, E.M. Genetic modification of human trabecular meshwork with lentiviral vectors. Hum. Gene Ther. 2001, 12, 2109–2119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Loewen, N.; Bahler, C.; Teo, W.L.; Whitwam, T.; Peretz, M.; Xu, R.; Fautsch, M.P.; Johnson, D.H.; Poeschla, E.M. Preservation of aqueous outflow facility after second-generation FIV vector-mediated expression of marker genes in anterior segments of human eyes. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2002, 43, 3686–3690. [Google Scholar]
  97. Lotery, A.J.; Derksen, T.A.; Russell, S.R.; Mullins, R.F.; Sauter, S.; Affatigato, L.M.; Stone, E.M.; Davidson, B.L. Gene transfer to the nonhuman primate retina with recombinant feline immunodeficiency virus vectors. Hum. Gene Ther. 2002, 13, 689–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Derksen, T.A.; Sauter, S.L.; Davidson, B.L. Feline immunodeficiency virus vectors. Gene transfer to mouse retina following intravitreal injection. J. Gene Med. 2002, 4, 463–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Takahashi, K.; Luo, T.; Saishin, Y.; Saishin, Y.; Sung, J.; Hackett, S.; Brazzell, R.K.; Kaleko, M.; Campochiaro, P.A. Sustained transduction of ocular cells with a bovine immunodeficiency viral vector. Hum. Gene Ther. 2002, 13, 1305–1316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Beutelspacher, S.C.; Ardjomand, N.; Tan, P.H.; Patton, G.S.; Larkin, D.F.; George, A.J.; McClure, M.O. Comparison of HIV-1 and EIAV-based lentiviral vectors in corneal transduction. Exp. Eye Res. 2005, 80, 787–794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Cheng, L.; Toyoguchi, M.; Looney, D.J.; Lee, J.; Davidson, M.C.; Freeman, W.R. Efficient gene transfer to retinal pigment epithelium cells with long-term expression. Retina 2005, 25, 193–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Balaggan, K.S.; Binley, K.; Esapa, M.; Iqball, S.; Askham, Z.; Kan, O.; Tschernutter, M.; Bainbridge, J.W.; Naylor, S.; Ali, R.R. Stable and efficient intraocular gene transfer using pseudotyped EIAV lentiviral vectors. J. Gene Med. 2006, 8, 275–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Nicoud, M.; Kong, J.; Iqball, S.; Kan, O.; Naylor, S.; Gouras, P.; Allikmets, R.; Binley, K. Development of photoreceptor-specific promoters and their utility to investigate EIAV lentiviral vector mediated gene transfer to photoreceptors. J. Gene Med. 2007, 9, 1015–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Suh, L.H.; Zhang, C.; Chuck, R.S.; Stark, W.J.; Naylor, S.; Binley, K.; Chakravarti, S.; Jun, A.S. Cryopreservation and lentiviral-mediated genetic modification of human primary cultured corneal endothelial cells. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2007, 48, 3056–3061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Janic, B.; Zhang, X.; Li, W. Feline immunodeficiency virus-mediated long-term transgene expression in undifferentiated retinal progenitor cells and its downregulation in differentiated cells. Mol. Vis. 2008, 14, 2117–2125. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  106. Khare, P.D.; Loewen, N.; Teo, W.; Barraza, R.A.; Saenz, D.T.; Johnson, D.H.; Poeschla, E.M. Durable, safe, multi-gene lentiviral vector expression in feline trabecular meshwork. Mol. Ther. 2008, 16, 97–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Kong, J.; Kim, S.R.; Binley, K.; Pata, I.; Doi, K.; Mannik, J.; Zernant-Rajang, J.; Kan, O.; Iqball, S.; Naylor, S.; et al. Correction of the disease phenotype in the mouse model of Stargardt disease by lentiviral gene therapy. Gene Ther. 2008, 15, 1311–1320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  108. Kachi, S.; Binley, K.; Yokoi, K.; Umeda, N.; Akiyama, H.; Muramatu, D.; Iqball, S.; Kan, O.; Naylor, S.; Campochiaro, P.A. Equine infectious anemia viral vector-mediated codelivery of endostatin and angiostatin driven by retinal pigmented epithelium-specific VMD2 promoter inhibits choroidal neovascularization. Hum. Gene Ther. 2009, 20, 31–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  109. Barraza, R.A.; Rasmussen, C.A.; Loewen, N.; Cameron, J.D.; Gabelt, B.T.; Teo, W.L.; Kaufman, P.L.; Poeschla, E.M. Prolonged transgene expression with lentiviral vectors in the aqueous humor outflow pathway of nonhuman primates. Hum. Gene Ther. 2009, 20, 191–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  110. Liu, C.; Cheng, Q.; Nguyen, T.; Bonanno, J.A. Knockdown of NBCe1 in vivo compromises the corneal endothelial pump. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2010, 51, 5190–5197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Binley, K.; Widdowson, P.S.; Kelleher, M.; de Belin, J.; Loader, J.; Ferrige, G.; Carlucci, M.; Esapa, M.; Chipchase, D.; Angell-Manning, D.; et al. Safety and biodistribution of an equine infectious anemia virus-based gene therapy, RetinoStat(®), for age-related macular degeneration. Hum. Gene Ther. 2012, 23, 980–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Binley, K.; Widdowson, P.; Loader, J.; Kelleher, M.; Iqball, S.; Ferrige, G.; de Belin, J.; Carlucci, M.; Angell-Manning, D.; Hurst, F.; et al. Transduction of photoreceptors with equine infectious anemia virus lentiviral vectors: Safety and biodistribution of StarGen for Stargardt disease. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2013, 54, 4061–4071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Parker, M.; Bellec, J.; McFarland, T.; Scripps, V.; Appukuttan, B.; Hartzell, M.; Yeager, A.; Hady, T.; Mitrophanous, K.A.; Stout, T.; et al. Suppression of neovascularization of donor corneas by transduction with equine infectious anemia virus-based lentiviral vectors expressing endostatin and angiostatin. Hum. Gene Ther. 2014, 25, 408–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Fouladi, N.; Parker, M.; Kennedy, V.; Binley, K.; McCloskey, L.; Loader, J.; Kelleher, M.; Mitrophanous, K.A.; Stout, J.T.; Ellis, S. Safety and Efficacy of OXB-202, a Genetically Engineered Tissue Therapy for the Prevention of Rejection in High-Risk Corneal Transplant Patients. Hum. Gene Ther. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Zallocchi, M.; Binley, K.; Lad, Y.; Ellis, S.; Widdowson, P.; Iqball, S.; Scripps, V.; Kelleher, M.; Loader, J.; Miskin, J.; et al. EIAV-based retinal gene therapy in the shaker1 mouse model for usher syndrome type 1B: Development of UshStat. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e94272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Campochiaro, P.A.; Lauer, A.K.; Sohn, E.H.; Mir, T.A.; Naylor, S.; Anderton, M.C.; Kelleher, M.; Harrop, R.; Ellis, S.; Mitrophanous, K.A. Lentiviral Vector Gene Transfer of Endostatin/Angiostatin for Macular Degeneration (GEM) Study. Hum. Gene Ther. 2017, 28, 99–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  117. Boye, S.E.; Alexander, J.J.; Witherspoon, C.D.; Boye, S.L.; Peterson, J.J.; Clark, M.E.; Sandefer, K.J.; Girkin, C.A.; Hauswirth, W.W.; Gamlin, P.D. Highly Efficient Delivery of Adeno-Associated Viral Vectors to the Primate Retina. Hum. Gene Ther. 2016, 27, 580–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  118. Kotterman, M.A.; Yin, L.; Strazzeri, J.M.; Flannery, J.G.; Merigan, W.H.; Schaffer, D.V. Antibody neutralization poses a barrier to intravitreal adeno-associated viral vector gene delivery to non-human primates. Gene Ther. 2015, 22, 116–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Dalkara, D.; Kolstad, K.D.; Caporale, N.; Visel, M.; Klimczak, R.R.; Schaffer, D.V.; Flannery, J.G. Inner limiting membrane barriers to AAV-mediated retinal transduction from the vitreous. Mol. Ther. 2009, 17, 2096–2102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  120. Grüter, O.; Kostic, C.; Crippa, S.V.; Perez, M.T.; Zografos, L.; Schorderet, D.F.; Munier, F.L.; Arsenijevic, Y. Lentiviral vector-mediated gene transfer in adult mouse photoreceptors is impaired by the presence of a physical barrier. Gene Ther. 2005, 12, 942–947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  121. Bainbridge, J.W.; Stephens, C.; Parsley, K.; Demaison, C.; Halfyard, A.; Thrasher, A.J.; Ali, R.R. In vivo gene transfer to the mouse eye using an HIV-based lentiviral vector; efficient long-term transduction of corneal endothelium and retinal pigment epithelium. Gene Ther. 2001, 8, 1665–1668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  122. Brunette, I.; Le Francois, M.; Tremblay, M.; Guertin, M.C. Corneal transplant tolerance of cryopreservation. Cornea 2001, 20, 590–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Fernandez, M.M.; Afshari, N.A. Endothelial Keratoplasty: From DLEK to DMEK. Middle East Afr. J. Ophthalmol. 2010, 17, 5–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  124. Rotondaro, L.; Mele, A.; Rovera, G. Efficiency of different viral promoters in directing gene expression in mammalian cells: Effect of 3’-untranslated sequences. Gene 1996, 168, 195–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Addison, C.L.; Hitt, M.; Kunsken, D.; Graham, F.L. Comparison of the human versus murine cytomegalovirus immediate early gene promoters for transgene expression by adenoviral vectors. J. Gen. Virol. 1997, 78, 1653–1661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Pannell, D.; Ellis, J. Silencing of gene expression: Implications for design of retrovirus vectors. Rev. Med. Virol. 2001, 11, 205–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  127. Ellis, J. Silencing and variegation of gammaretrovirus and lentivirus vectors. Hum. Gene Ther. 2005, 16, 1241–1246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  128. Ramunas, J.; Montgomery, H.J.; Kelly, L.; Sukonnik, T.; Ellis, J.; Jervis, E.J. Real-time fluorescence tracking of dynamic transgene variegation in stem cells. Mol. Ther. 2007, 15, 810–817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  129. Henikoff, S. Position-effect variegation after 60 years. Trends Genet. 1990, 6, 422–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Clark, A.J.; Bissinger, P.; Bullock, D.W.; Damak, S.; Wallace, R.; Whitelaw, C.B.; Yull, F. Chromosomal position effects and the modulation of transgene expression. Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 1994, 6, 589–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  131. Karpen, G.H. Position-effect variegation and the new biology of heterochromatin. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 1994, 4, 281–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Emery, D.W. The use of chromatin insulators to improve the expression and safety of integrating gene transfer vectors. Hum. Gene Ther. 2011, 22, 761–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Cavalieri, V.; Melfi, R.; Spinelli, G. Promoter activity of the sea urchin (Paracentrotus lividus) nucleosomal H3 and H2A and linker H1 {alpha}-histone genes is modulated by enhancer and chromatin insulator. Nucleic Acids Res. 2009, 37, 7407–7415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Cavalieri, V.; Melfi, R.; Spinelli, G. The Compass-like locus, exclusive to the Ambulacrarians, encodes a chromatin insulator binding protein in the sea urchin embryo. PLoS Genet. 2013, 9, e1003847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  135. Liu, M.; Maurano, M.T.; Wang, H.; Qi, H.; Song, C.Z.; Navas, P.A.; Emery, D.W.; Stamatoyannopoulos, J.A.; Stamatoyannopoulos, G. Genomic discovery of potent chromatin insulators for human gene therapy. Nat. Biotechnol. 2015, 33, 198–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Baiamonte, E.; Spinelli, G.; Maggio, A.; Acuto, S.; Cavalieri, V. The Sea Urchin sns5 Chromatin Insulator Shapes the Chromatin Architecture of a Lentivirus Vector Integrated in the Mammalian Genome. Nucleic Acid Ther. 2016, 26, 318–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Bemelmans, A.P.; Bonnel, S.; Houhou, L.; Dufour, N.; Nandrot, E.; Helmlinger, D.; Sarkis, C.; Abitbol, M.; Mallet, J. Retinal cell type expression specificity of HIV-1-derived gene transfer vectors upon subretinal injection in the adult rat: Influence of pseudotyping and promoter. J. Gene Med. 2005, 7, 1367–1374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  138. Allikmets, R.; Singh, N.; Sun, H.; Shroyer, N.F.; Hutchinson, A.; Chidambaram, A.; Gerrard, B.; Baird, L.; Stauffer, D.; Peiffer, A.; et al. A photoreceptor cell-specific ATP-binding transporter gene (ABCR) is mutated in recessive Stargardt macular dystrophy. Nat. Genet. 1997, 15, 236–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  139. Molday, L.L.; Rabin, A.R.; Molday, R.S. ABCR expression in foveal cone photoreceptors and its role in Stargardt macular dystrophy. Nat. Genet. 2000, 25, 257–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  140. Martínez-Mir, A.; Paloma, E.; Allikmets, R.; Ayuso, C.; del Rio, T.; Dean, M.; Vilageliu, L.; Gonzàlez-Duarte, R.; Balcells, S. Retinitis pigmentosa caused by a homozygous mutation in the Stargardt disease gene ABCR. Nat. Genet. 1998, 18, 11–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  141. Rivera, A.; White, K.; Stöhr, H.; Steiner, K.; Hemmrich, N.; Grimm, T.; Jurklies, B.; Lorenz, B.; Scholl, H.P.; Apfelstedt-Sylla, E.; et al. A comprehensive survey of sequence variation in the ABCA4 (ABCR) gene in Stargardt disease and age-related macular degeneration. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 2000, 67, 800–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  142. Lévy, G.; Levi-Acobas, F.; Blanchard, S.; Gerber, S.; Larget-Piet, D.; Chenal, V.; Liu, X.Z.; Newton, V.; Steel, K.P.; Brown, S.D.; et al. Myosin VIIA gene: Heterogeneity of the mutations responsible for Usher syndrome type IB. Hum. Mol. Genet. 1997, 6, 111–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  143. Distler, J.H.; Hirth, A.; Kurowska-Stolarska, M.; Gay, R.E.; Gay, S.; Distler, O. Angiogenic and angiostatic factors in the molecular control of angiogenesis. Q. J. Nucl. Med. 2003, 47, 149–161. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  144. Price, M.O.; Thompson, R.W., Jr.; Price, F.W., Jr. Risk factors for various causes of failure in initial corneal grafts. Arch. Ophthalmol. 2003, 121, 1087–1092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  145. Chan, C. Animal Models of Ophthalmic Diseases; Springer International Publishing: Basel, Switzerland, 2016; XV 152; p. 13. ISBN 978-3-319-19433-2. [Google Scholar]
  146. Volland, S.; Esteve-Rudd, J.; Hoo, J.; Yee, C.; Williams, D.S. A comparison of some organizational characteristics of the mouse central retina and the human macula. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0125631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  147. Al-Zamil, W.M.; Yassin, S.A. Recent developments in age-related macular degeneration: A review. Clin. Interv. Aging 2017, 12, 1313–1330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  148. DeAngelis, M.M.; Owen, L.A.; Morrison, M.A.; Morgan, D.J.; Li, M.; Shakoor, A.; Vitale, A.; Iyengar, S.; Stambolian, D.; Kim, I.K.; et al. Genetics of age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Hum. Mol. Genet. 2017, 26, R45–R50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. Bibliowicz, J.; Tittle, R.K.; Gross, J.M. Toward a better understanding of human eye disease insights from the zebrafish, Danio rerio. Prog. Mol. Biol. Transl. Sci. 2011, 100, 287–330. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  150. Chhetri, J.; Jacobson, G.; Gueven, N. Zebrafish-on the move towards ophthalmological. Eye 2014, 28, 367–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  151. Richardson, R.; Tracey-White, D.; Webster, A.; Moosajee, M. The zebrafish eye-a paradigm for investigating human ocular genetics. Eye 2017, 31, 68–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  152. Goishi, K.; Shimizu, A.; Najarro, G.; Watanabe, S.; Rogers, R.; Zon, L.I.; Klagsbrun, M. AlphaA-crystallin expression prevents gamma-crystallin insolubility and cataract formation in the zebrafish cloche mutant lens. Development 2006, 133, 2585–2593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  153. Bahadori, R.; Huber, M.; Rinner, O.; Seeliger, M.W.; Geiger-Rudolph, S.; Geisler, R.; Neuhauss, S.C. Retinal function and morphology in two zebrafish models of oculo-renal syndromes. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2003, 18, 1377–1386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  154. Cao, Z.; Jensen, L.D.; Rouhi, P.; Hosaka, K.; Lanne, T.; Steffensen, J.F.; Wahlberg, E.; Cao, Y. Hypoxia-induced retinopathy model in adult zebrafish. Nat. Protoc. 2010, 5, 1903–1910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  155. Cao, R.; Jensen, L.D.; Soll, I.; Hauptmann, G.; Cao, Y. Hypoxia-induced retinal angiogenesis in zebrafish as a model to study retinopathy. PLoS ONE 2008, 3, e2748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  156. Biehlmaier, O.; Neuhauss, S.C.; Kohler, K. Double cone dystrophy and RPE degeneration in the retina of the zebrafish gnn mutant. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2003, 44, 1287–1298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  157. Bilotta, J.; Saszik, S. The zebrafish as a model visual system. Int. J. Dev. Neurosci. 2001, 19, 621–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table
Table 1. Non-primate lentiviruses and their host tropism.
Table 1. Non-primate lentiviruses and their host tropism.
Non-Primate LentivirusNatural HostHistorical References
visna-maedi virus (VMV)Sheep[13,14]
caprine arthritis encephalitis virus (CAEV)Goat[15,16]
equine infectious anaemia virus (EIAV)Horse[17,18]
feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV)Cat[19,20]
bovine immunodeficiency virus (BIV)Cattle[21,22]
Jembrana disease virus (JDV)Bali cattle[23,24]
Table
Table 2. Differential distribution of accessory genes among non-primate lentivirus genomes.
Table 2. Differential distribution of accessory genes among non-primate lentivirus genomes.
Accessory GeneNon-Primate Lentivirus
VMVCAEVEIAVFIVBIVJDV
rev++++ a++
vif++-+++
tat+ b+ b+-++
orfS++++ c--
vpy/vpw----+-
tmx----++
s2--+---
a The Rev protein of FIV bears a divergent non-consensus nuclear export signal; b Tat proteins from VMV and CAEV lack the transactivation function; c orfS gene of FIV is called orf2.
Table
Table 3. Overview of studies using non-primate lentiviral vectors for ocular gene delivery.
Table 3. Overview of studies using non-primate lentiviral vectors for ocular gene delivery.
Non-Primate Lentiviral VectorTarget Host Cell/Tissue/OrganismDelivered GenesReferences
FIVPerfused human eyeslacZ, eGFP[95,96]
FIVMacaque lacZ[97]
FIVMouse lacZ, β-glucuronidase[98]
BIVMouse eGFP[99]
EIAVRabbit and human corneas, murine corneal endothelial cellslacZ, eGFP[100]
FIVRabbit, ratlacZ[101]
EIAVMouse eGFP[102]
EIAVMouse lacZ[103]
EIAVCryopreserved primary cultured human corneal endothelial cellseGFP[104]
FIVMouse retinal progenitor cellsYFP[105]
FIVCat eGFP/myocilin a, lacZ[106]
EIAVMouse lacZ, human ABCA4[107]
EIAVMouse endostatin/angiostatin a[108]
FIVMacaque eGFP[109]
FIVRabbit NBCe1-shRNA/copepod-GFP a[110]
EIAV (RetinoStat)Rabbit, macaqueendostatin/angiostatin a[111]
EIAV (StarGen)Rabbit, macaqueABCA4[112]
EIAV (EncorStat)Rabbit, primate and human corneal tissueendostatin/angiostatin a[113,114]
EIAV (UshStat)Mouse, macaquemyo7A[115]
EIAV (RetinoStat)Human patientsendostatin/angiostatin a[116]
a the indicated transcription units were co-delivered from lentiviral vectors bearing bicistronic transgenes.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Cavalieri, V.; Baiamonte, E.; Lo Iacono, M. Non-Primate Lentiviral Vectors and Their Applications in Gene Therapy for Ocular Disorders. Viruses 2018, 10, 316. https://doi.org/10.3390/v10060316

AMA Style

Cavalieri V, Baiamonte E, Lo Iacono M. Non-Primate Lentiviral Vectors and Their Applications in Gene Therapy for Ocular Disorders. Viruses. 2018; 10(6):316. https://doi.org/10.3390/v10060316

Chicago/Turabian Style

Cavalieri, Vincenzo, Elena Baiamonte, and Melania Lo Iacono. 2018. "Non-Primate Lentiviral Vectors and Their Applications in Gene Therapy for Ocular Disorders" Viruses 10, no. 6: 316. https://doi.org/10.3390/v10060316

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop