We would like to use pseudotyped virus to perform our experiments at the BSL-2 lab and I mainly find systems based on either VSV or HIV. Any suggestions on why choosing one versus the other? Thanks!
Dear Judit Serrat , i assume you are working with lentiviral vector systems (which can be psedotyped with many other viruses, depends on experiment / goals of the study. The advantage of lentiviruses over “simple” retroviruses in relevant situations is the ability of lentiviruses to transduce both dividing and non-dividing cells (with a long-term stable transgene expression).
Now, Lentiviral vectors pseudotyped with VSV / VSV.G are well known systems, and science has experiences in many fields with VSV/VSV.G through their ubiquitous use. Recombinant VSV-based Pseudotypes has many advantages, but like all viral vector systems, some disadvantages as well. Regarding VSV/VSV-G advantages, I would tend to mention the famous VSV’s onco-selectivity, one important characteristic which has its root in sensitivity of SVS to type I interferon dependent cellular immune responses. In healthy cells, which express a robust IFN-1 response, a VSV infection will be significantly inhibited, but in malignant cells without IFN-1 response or with defect IFN-1 pathway, VCV will replicate very well. The result is the lysis of malignant cells.
Another potential advantage is that VSV-G binds LDL-Receptor family members, so this vector systems are able to infect a wide range of cell types of many distinct host species.
A disadvantage of SVS (observed in SVS-based vaccine vector systems) is its neurotropism, and therefore potential neurotoxicity. Also, the strong immunogenicity of SVS.G (Glycoprotein) based vector systems rules out an efficient Readministration , due to the massive immunoglobulin response generated during the prime phase. SVS envelope glycoprotein is a highly immunogenic protein.
Lentiviral vectors pseudotyped with heterologous HIV-1 Env glycoproteins are needed in measurement of antibody-mediated HIV-1 neutralization studies.