Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Dec 13.
Published in final edited form as: J Mol Biol. 2013 Oct 2;425(24):10.1016/j.jmb.2013.09.038. doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2013.09.038

Antiviral Mechanisms of Human Defensins

Sarah S Wilson 1,*, Mayim E Wiens 1,*, Jason G Smith 1,#
PMCID: PMC3842434  NIHMSID: NIHMS530601  PMID: 24095897

Abstract

Defensins are an effector component of the innate immune system with broad antimicrobial activity. Humans express two types of defensins, α- and β-defensins, which have antiviral activity against both enveloped and non-enveloped viruses. The diversity of defensin-sensitive viral species reflects a multitude of antiviral mechanisms. These include direct defensin targeting of viral envelopes, glycoproteins, and capsids in addition to inhibition of viral fusion and post-entry neutralization. Binding and modulation of host cell surface receptors and disruption of intracellular signaling by defensins can also inhibit viral replication. In addition, defensins can function as chemokines to augment and alter adaptive immune responses, revealing an indirect antiviral mechanism. Nonetheless, many questions regarding the antiviral activities of defensins remain. Although significant mechanistic data is known for α-defensins, molecular details for β-defensin inhibition are mostly lacking. Importantly, the role of defensin antiviral activity in vivo has not been addressed due to the lack of a complete defensin knockout model. Overall, the antiviral activity of defensins is well established as are the variety of mechanisms by which defensins achieve this inhibition; however, additional research is needed to fully understand the role of defensins in viral pathogenesis.

Keywords: virus, defensin, antimicrobial peptides, innate immunity

1. Introduction and Scope1

Defensins are one of the most abundant classes of antimicrobial peptides in humans and have primarily been studied as effector components of the innate immune response with direct antibacterial activity. However, their antiviral properties were appreciated from the earliest functional studies of α-defensins 1; 2. In fact, their ability to neutralize herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV-1) was one of the defining criteria in the identification and purification of the α-defensins human neutrophil peptide 1 (HNP1), HNP2, and HNP3 from human neutrophils 3. In this review, we will summarize the known activities of α- and β-defensins against viruses, and we refer the reader to additional recent reviews on this topic for further insight 4; 5; 6; 7. Our focus will be primarily on human defensins, and we have organized our discussion by mechanism (Figure 1) to emphasize commonalities in the antiviral activities of defensins against diverse viral families.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Major antiviral mechanisms of defensins. Defensins inhibit many steps in enveloped and non-enveloped viral infection. Mechanistic information is available for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), human parainfluenza virus (HPIV), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), herpes simplex virus (HSV), influenza A virus (IAV), BK virus (BK), human adenovirus (HAdV), and human papillomavirus (HPV). Most mechanisms impact viral entry, but post-entry effects have been described. We have omitted defensin effects that have been reported but their contribution to blocking infection is in doubt (e.g., aggregation of HAdV by α-defensins). Note that although the defensins relevant for each virus at each step are indicated in broad classifications (e.g., β-defensins), in most cases not all of the defensins within these groups have been tested or have equivalent activity.

2. Defensin Structure, Expression, and Physiologic Concentrations

The structure, evolution, and tissue distribution of defensins have been summarized in a number of recent reviews 4; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13. Briefly, defensins are small (~29–42 amino acid) cationic, amphipathic peptides with a predominantly β-sheet structure stabilized by 3 disulfide bonds. They can be broadly classified on the basis of structure and disulfide bond organization into three groups: α-, β-, and θ-defensins. As humans lack θ-defensins, they will not be discussed in detail; however, their antiviral properties have been recently reviewed 8; 14. Humans express six α-defensins and up to 31 β-defensins 15. The α-defensins can be further subdivided into myeloid (HNP1-4) and enteric [human defensin (HD) 5 and 6] peptides on the basis of both expression patterns and genetic organization 11. All of the α-defensins have been shown to multimerize into at least dimers either in solution or in crystal structures 16; 17; 18; 19. HNP1-4 are predominantly expressed by neutrophils but can also be found in or expressed by monocyte/macrophages, natural killer (NK) cells, some T cells, B cells, and immature dendritic cells (DCs) 11; 13. HD5 and HD6 are expressed by specialized epithelial Paneth cells of the small intestine 20; 21. HD5 is also expressed by epithelial cells in the male and female genitourinary tract 22; 23; 24; 25. Human β-defensins (HBDs) are more widely expressed by epithelial cells in skin and at mucosal surfaces in contact with the environment 26. Like the α-defensins, some β-defensins (e.g., HBD3) exist in oligomeric forms, while others, such as HBD1 and HBD2, are monomeric 27. They are also expressed by monocytes, macrophages, and certain DCs, and a subset of β-defensins are only expressed in the male reproductive tract 26; 28. Although there are commonalities in expression patterns of defensins in humans and other species, one important difference relevant for experimental models of infectious disease is that mice lack myeloid α-defensins 29; 30.

Quantification of physiologic defensin concentrations in vivo is complex, as defensins are present at high local concentrations within specific cell types or upon release from cells into confined anatomical niches (e.g., crypts of the small intestine) but can become diluted in extracellular fluids. For the myeloid α-defensins, Daher et al. estimated ~3 mM (10 mg/ml) HNPs in neutrophils, with even higher local concentrations in the azurophilic granules in which they are stored 1. For the enteric α-defensins, Ayabe et al. estimated concentrations of ≥3.5 mM (15–100 mg/ml) in the crypt lumen, the site of Paneth cell degranulation 31. These concentrations are likely similar in the human small intestine, where HD5 expression exceeds that of HD6 by 6-fold 32. In healthy patients, epithelial lining fluid of the lung contains 31–79 nM HNP1-3, nasal fluid contains ~2.7 μM HNP1-3, saliva contains 0.3–3 μM HNP1-3, and vaginal secretions contain ~1.5 μM HNPs and 0.3–14 μM HD5 23; 33; 34; 35; 36; 37; 38. For the β-defensins, 5–10 nM HBD2 has been measured in nasal fluid 37; 39. However, in certain disease states defensin levels can be highly elevated. For example, 57 μM to 2.4 mM concentrations of HNP1 have been found in epithelial lining fluid of cystic fibrosis patients 36. Overall, the concentrations of defensins present in vivo are generally within the range that is needed for direct antiviral activity by α-defensins and generally below the concentrations required for direct antiviral activity by β-defensins.

3. Antiviral mechanisms through direct interactions between defensins and virus

Modes and determinants of defensin binding to viruses

There are multiple modes of defensin binding to ligands such as viral particles. First, defensins interact with lipid bilayers, which is facilitated by the presence of negatively charged phospholipids 11; 13; 40. Second, four of the α-defensins (HNP1-3 and HD5) and HBD3 are lectins capable of binding to glycoproteins and glycolipids 41; 42; 43; 44. Third, defensins can potentially engage in protein-protein or protein-DNA interactions. Because they are cationic and amphipathic, defensins interact with ligands through both charge-charge and hydrophobic interactions. Defensin oligomerization, particularly for α-defensins, and conformational stability imparted by disulfide bonds may further influence binding. Each of these interactions contributes to the antiviral activity of defensins, and their relative importance depends on the specific virus/defensin pair under investigation.

The property of defensins that has been most widely investigated for its contribution to antiviral activity is stabilization of the 3D structural fold through the formation of disulfide bonds. Generally, destabilized or “linear” defensins are generated by substituting the conserved cysteine residues either in toto, individually, or in pairs to natural or non-natural residues that cannot form disulfide bonds such as serine or α-amino-n-butyric acid (Abu). Alternatively, wild type defensins are reduced and chemically modified (alkylated) to prevent disulfide bond formation. All reported studies have shown that the disulfide-stabilized forms of α-defensins are required to either inhibit [HSV-1, human adenovirus serotype 5 (HAdV-5), influenza A virus (IAV), and human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1)] or enhance (HIV-1) virus infection 1; 2; 45; 46; 47; 48. In two cases, the antiviral activity of β-defensins was unaffected by “linearization” 49; 50. Given the paucity of data in this regard for β-defensins, it is unclear if this is a fundamental difference between α- and β-defensin antiviral activity. Together, these studies suggest that the effects of α-defensins on virus infection are more likely to be due to their amphipathicity or ability to multimerize, which are structurally dependent, rather than the net positive charge of the molecule that is common to both native and “linearized” forms.

The capacity of defensins to function as lectins and bind selectively to sugars contributes to their antiviral properties; however, defensins also bind to host cellular and serum proteins 1; 41. The relative affinity for viral targets versus serum components may explain why some defensins are only antiviral against particular viruses in the absence of serum. Although it has been shown that HD5 binds natural viral glycoproteins, notably HSV-1 glycoprotein D (gD) and HIV-1 gp120, with a higher affinity than bovine serum albumin or fetuin, serum substantially attenuates the antiviral activity of HNP1 against HSV-1, even at low concentrations 1; 3; 41. Nonetheless, this effect can be overcome at higher HNP1 concentrations or by pre-incubating the virus with HNP1 before it is added to cells. The addition of serum also abrogates the antiviral activity of HNP1-3, HBD2, and HBD3 against both X4 and R5 tropic HIV-1 51; 52. Serum also competes for HD5 binding to and inhibition of HAdV, which lacks viral glycoproteins 53. Two notable exceptions to the abrogating effects of serum are inhibition of human papillomavirus (HPV) and human BK virus (BKV) infection by α-defensins, which are not blocked by 10% or 5% serum respectively 54; 55. The effect of serum on the modulation of HIV-1 infection by HD5 is complicated by cytotoxicity of HD5 for primary CD4+ T cells. Thus, application of HIV-1 pre-incubated with HD5 in the presence or absence of low serum (1-2%) to primary CD4+ T cells results in enhanced HIV-1 infection if the cells are subsequently cultured under standard conditions (10% FBS and IL-2) but results in cell death if the cells are maintained in serum-deprived conditions 46; 56; 57. Previously, HD5 was found to be pro-apoptotic for primary CD4+ T cells in the absence of serum at concentrations as low as 1.4 μM58. In contrast, under both serum conditions HD5 enhances HIV-1 infection of HeLa cells expressing CD4 and CCR5 and is non-cytotoxic 46; 56. Rapid inactivation by binding to serum components may protect host cells from damage by defensins; however, defensins likely remain potently antiviral in vivo at high local concentrations upon initial secretion and in serum-free anatomical locations (e.g., phagocytic vacuoles or the bowel lumen).

Although much of the antibacterial activity of defensins is attenuated at physiologic salt concentrations 11, this is not generally true for their antiviral activity. One instance of salt-sensitivity is that HBD2 and HBD3 have attenuated anti-HIV activity in physiological salt concentrations 52, which is somewhat surprising given that even the antibacterial effects of HBD3 are generally not salt-sensitive 59. Nonetheless, the anti-HIV activity of these β-defensins in low salt and serum-free conditions may reflect the physiological conditions of the oral cavity 60; 61. We have shown that super-physiological concentrations of salt inhibit HD5 binding to HAdV, which implicates charge-charge interactions in HD5 binding to the viral capsid 53; 62. In general, differential salt sensitivity may reflect variation in both the molecular interactions and the mechanisms of defensin-mediated killing or neutralization of viruses versus bacteria.

A limited number of structure-function studies have evaluated the roles of additional features of α-defensins in modulating viral infection. We have shown that the conserved salt bridge stabilizing a loop between two beta strands of HD5 is dispensable for HAdV-5 inhibition 45. Similarly, mutation of an invariant glycine residue (Gly17) of HNP2 to glutamate severely attenuates the antibacterial activity of HNP2 but results in only a minor loss of antiviral activity against HPV-16 54; 63. In contrast, specific arginine residues are critical for HD5 binding to HAdV-5 and HPV-16, and this activity is not purely charge-dependent, as lysine substitutions for selected arginine residues did not preserve antiviral activity 62. Likewise, single arginine mutations at R9H or R13H of HD5 attenuate enhancement of HIV-1 infection, indicating that this property is also not simply charge-dependent 64. Furthermore, the capacity of HD5 to self-associate is critical for antiviral activity against both HAdV-5 and HPV-16 and for HIV-1 gp120 and HSV-1 gD binding 41; 62; 65; 66. These properties were revealed through mutations that disrupt defensin activity. In the converse approach, residues in HD5 under positive selection were mutated in an effort to augment the antiviral activity of HD5 against HSV-2 67. One mutant, (HD5 E21R) demonstrated improved anti-HSV-2 and anti-HIV-1 activity in cell culture and was both prophylactically (1 hour before infection) and therapeutically (24 hours after infection) protective against lethal HSV-2 challenge in a mouse model. Collectively, these studies suggest that specific features of viruses are selectively bound by defensins, and that the binding interface of the defensin is sequence-specific and not merely charge-dependent.

The basis for selective recognition of diverse viruses by defensins is largely unknown. Defensins may interact with either the lipid bilayer or envelope glycoproteins of enveloped viruses; however, protein-protein interactions must be critical for binding to non-enveloped viruses (e.g., HPV and HAdV) and likely contribute to binding to enveloped viruses as well. For HIV-1, competition with site-specific antibodies was used to map HNP2 binding sites on gp120 68. For species C HAdV (HAdV-C), we have used structural studies and a chimeric approach to identify capsid determinants of HD5 binding 45; 69. Other than for these two viruses, almost nothing is known about specific determinants of the viral particle that dictate defensin binding. Nonetheless, the fact that closely related defensins have differential antiviral (or infection-enhancing) effects indicates selectivity and may inform the design of future studies to elucidate the basis for recognition. In this regard, Table 1 summarizes the known effects of defensins on virus infection, including those defensins that have been tested but not found to be antiviral against specific viruses.

Table 1.

Known effects of defensins on virus infection.

Virusa Envb HNPc HDc HBDc References
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4
CMV Y I * * * * * * * * * [1]
HIV-1 Y I I I I E E NE I I * [52, 66, 83]
HPIV-3 Y * * * * * * NE I * * [73]
HSV-1/-2 Y I I I I I I NE NE I * [1, 44]
IAV Y I I I I I I I I * * [48, 97, 98]
RSV Y * * * * * * NE I * * [73]
VSV Y I * * * * * * * * * [1]
VV Y NE * * * * * NE NE I * [73, 93, 129]
VZV Y * * * * * * * I * * [92]
AAV N I I * * * * * * * * [36]
Echovirus N NE * * * * * * * * * [1]
HAdV- N
 A I * * * I * * * * * [45, 58, 165, 166]
 B I * * * I * NE NE * *
 C I * * * I * NE NE * *
 D E * * * E * NE NE * *
 E E * * * I * * * * *
 F E * * * NE * * * * *
HPV N I I I I I NE NE NE * * [59]
PyV- N
 BKV I * * * I * NE I * * [60]
 JCV I * * * I * I I * *
 SV40 NE * * * I * NE NE * *
HRV N * * * * * * * NE * * [39]
Reovirus N NE * * * * * * * * * [1]
a

CMV, cytomegalovirus; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; HPIV, human parainfluenza virus; HSV, herpes simplex virus; IAV, influenza A virus; RSV, respiratory syncytial virus; VSV, vesicular stomatitis virus; VV, vaccinia virus; VZV, varicella zoster virus; AAV, adeno-associated virus; HAdV, human adenovirus; HPV, human papillomavirus; PyV, polyomavirus; BKV, BK virus; JCV, JC virus; SV40, simian virus 40; HRV, human rhinovirus

b

enveloped (Y) or non-enveloped (N) virus

c

HNP, human neutrophil peptide; HD, human defensin; HBD, human β-defensin; I, inhibit; E, enhanced;*, not tested; NE, no effect

Direct virus inactivation by affecting envelope

Direct interactions between defensins and structural components of the virion, particularly the lipid bilayer of enveloped viruses, could destroy or destabilize the virus and render it non-infectious. This mechanism was proposed in the first studies of the antiviral activity of human and rabbit neutrophil α-defensins 1; 2; 3; 70. In support of this hypothesis, HSV-1 inactivation by rabbit NP-2 or HNP1 was impaired at temperatures below 20°C and was more effective at 40°C than 37°C, implicating the fluidity of the membrane rather than binding as an important parameter 1; 2. HNP1 has also been shown to bind directly to HSV-1 and to model membranes containing phosphatidylserine 1. Nonetheless, the morphology of HSV-1 by electron microscopy was not altered by incubation with a neutralizing concentration of HNP1 1. HBD2 and HBD3 bind directly to and inactivate HIV-1, but if this interaction affects or damages the viral envelope is unknown 52; 71; 72. Similarly, treatment of HIV-1 with HNP1 in the absence of serum irreversibly decreases infectivity, although a physical change in particle integrity was not determined 71; 73. More recently, the lipid bilayer of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) exposed to neutralizing HBD2 but not non-neutralizing HBD1 was visibly damaged when assessed by electron microscopy 74. Although the universality of this phenotype was not quantified, the proteins of the bulk population of the virus were more buoyant in a density gradient, suggesting that most of the viral particles were disrupted. The altered morphology was correlated with a 70% reduction in virus attachment to the cell. This is perhaps the most convincing data for direct viral envelope disruption by a defensin and likely extends to human parainfluenza virus 3 (HPIV-3), which has a profile of defensin sensitivity similar to that of RSV 74.

The broad neutralization of many enveloped viruses supports the hypothesis that the lipid bilayer is the target; however, enveloped viruses are not universally susceptible and their sensitivity to α-defensins can be highly variable. For example, in one study rabbit NP-1 and NP-2 inhibited HSV-1 up to 1000-fold, HSV-2 10-fold, vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) 100-fold, and IAV 56-fold but had no effect on cytomegalovirus (CMV) 2. Similarly, HNP1 potently inhibited HSV-1 (1000-fold) and HSV-2 (100-fold) but only weakly inhibited CMV (6-fold), VSV (7-fold), and IAV (6-fold) 1; 3. Defensin perturbation of lipid bilayers is dependent upon their composition. It is favored by negatively charged phospholipids; whereas, neutral bilayers are largely inert to defensin 65; 75. The lipid content of viral envelopes is dependent upon the subcellular location and membrane microdomains from which they bud and likely varies among viral families 76. If direct membrane perturbation contributes to the antiviral effect of defensins, then differences in the lipid composition of the envelope may in part explain the differential susceptibility of viruses to defensins.

In contrast to disruption of enveloped viruses, increased capsid resistance to mechanical force or heat has been observed upon HD5 binding to non-enveloped HAdV-C 45; 53; 77. This effect correlates with the inability of the HD5-bound particle to uncoat, similar to a genetic mutant of HAdV-C that is stabilized by the presence of unprocessed precursor capsid proteins 53; 78; 79. A failure to uncoat precludes release of an internal, membrane-permeabilizing capsid protein, thereby blocking HAdV-C escape from the endosome and introduction of the viral genome into the nucleus, its replication niche 53; 79; 80; 81. Thus, unlike enveloped viruses where destabilization of the virion impairs infectivity, an opposite, stabilizing interaction with the non-enveloped HAdV-C capsid produces a similar outcome.

Extracellular aggregation

As many defensins form multimeric structures, which have been demonstrated in both crystal structures and in solution 16; 17; 18; 19; 27; 41, there is the potential that interactions between defensin peptides bound to neighboring viruses will cause virions to aggregate. This has been shown directly for IAV by HNP1 and HNP2 and for HAdV-5 and BK virus by HD5 55; 62; 82. For IAV, it is unclear if defensin-mediated aggregation is required to block infection. Similarly, aggregation of HAdV by HD5 is not sufficient to inhibit infection, as a non-neutralizing mutant of HD5 is able to induce aggregation 62. In contrast, aggregation and a concomitant inability to bind host cells have been shown to be the dominant mechanisms of neutralization for BK virus 55. The mechanism of inhibition of other polyomaviruses such as JC and SV40, which are also sensitive to HD5, has not been determined 55. In addition to multivalent binding due to defensin oligomerization, neutralization of capsid charge by defensin binding may reduce repulsion between virions. We have shown this directly for HAdV-C 62, and this effect may facilitate the aggregation of other viruses. These effects are likely interrelated, as mutants of HD5 that are impaired in self-association are incapable of both aggregating HAdV-C and fully neutralizing the capsid charge. Aggregation can impact viral infectivity by directly impeding cell binding or by causing viruses in clumps to enter fewer cells.

Blocking receptor binding

Defensin binding to viral attachment protein(s) could disrupt receptor interactions critical for viral entry into the cell. HNP1-3, HD5, and HBD3 bind a recombinant viral glycoprotein (gB) of both HSV-1 and HSV-2, which correlates with the ability of these defensins to inhibit HSV-1 and HSV-2 entry and adhesion 44; 83. Lectin activity of HNP1 is critical, as deglycosylation of HSV-2 gB abrogates binding 83. The contribution of glycoprotein binding to the antiviral mechanism of HD5 was underscored by a direct correlation between the capacity of HD5 mutants to neutralize HSV-2 and their affinity for recombinant gD (31). HNP4 and HD6 also inhibit HSV-1 and HSV-2 infection, but do not bind to viral glycoproteins 44. Instead, HNP4 and HD6 have been shown to bind heparan sulfate, the receptor for attachment, as well as other glycosaminoglycans. HBD3 is the only defensin able to bind both host cell receptors and viral glycoproteins 44. Those defensin that failed to bind gB or heparan sulfate, HBD1 and HBD2, were also unable to neutralize infection. Overall, blocking host cell receptors and binding to viral glycoproteins is a major mechanism by which defensins inhibit HSV-1 and HSV-2 infection.

Similarly, HNP1-4 bind HIV-1 gp41 and gp120 as well as the cell surface receptor CD4 43; 47; 84. The binding sites of HNP1 and HNP2 on gp120 have been mapped in antibody competition assays to the CD4 and co-receptor binding sites 68. Conversely, the HNP1 and HNP2 binding sites on CD4 have been mapped to the gp120 binding site 68. The mode of α-defensin binding to gp120 and gp41 may be complex, as both lectin-dependent and -independent binding have been reported. In an early study, deglycosylation of gp120 reduced HNP1 binding and abolished HNP2 and HNP3 binding 43; however, a more recent paper suggested that deglycosylation of gp120 or gp41 does not affect HNP1 binding 47. In addition, HNP4 binding is not abolished by deglycosylation of gp120 43, consistent with the observation that HNP4 binds more weakly to both polysaccharides and serum proteins 84. Nonetheless, HNP4 is a more potent inhibitor of HIV-1 than are HNP1-3 84. In summary, like for HSV, defensins directly interfere with HIV-1 binding and attachment.

In contrast to a block in cell binding, we have observed that receptor-dependent and -independent binding of HAdV-C to the cell is enhanced in the presence of a inhibitory concentration of HD5 45; 62. This effect may be related to neutralization of the net negative capsid charge, which promotes aggregation, in a manner comparable to enhancement of retrovirus infections by polybrene or HAdV infections by poly-cations 62; 85. Similarly, HIV-1 binding to cells and infection is enhanced by HD5 and HD6 46; 64. Thus, although in several cases the net effect of defensin binding to the virus is to block cellular attachment, the opposite effect has also been observed. The balance of these activities in vivo is unclear.

Inhibition of viral fusion with or penetration of host cell lipid bilayers

To introduce their genomes into host cells, enveloped viruses must fuse their lipid bilayer with that of the host cell 86. The fusion protein of the virus mediates this reaction by inserting a hydrophobic stretch of amino acids into the target cell membrane followed by a conformational change to a less energetic state, termed the six-helix bundle 87; 88. The energy for lipid fusion is derived from this conformational change. HIV-1 fusion, mediated by gp41, is inhibited by HNP1 47; 68. Inhibition requires the disulfide-stabilized form of HNP1 and is abrogated by serum 47. HNP1 aggregates recombinant peptides of both the carboxyl- and amino-termini of gp41 that comprise the six-helix bundle, suggesting a direct effect on formation of the post-fusion conformation of gp41 47. HNP1 also increases the binding and efficacy of neutralizing antibodies specific for the gp41 pre-hairpin conformation, likely due to greater antibody access to hidden neutralizing epitopes as a consequence of slowed refolding kinetics 89. Thus, HNP1 binding directly alters HIV-1 fusion through interactions with gp41. Whether this mechanism of HIV-1 neutralization extends to other viruses has not been shown; however, a different mechanism of β- and θ-defensin blockade of enveloped virus fusion due to host cell interactions will be discussed in Section 4.

Rather than fuse with the cell membrane, non-enveloped viruses must penetrate the limiting membrane of the host cell, which is generally mediated by a specific viral protein 90. This step may occur at the plasma membrane, but often follows a conformational change leading to uncoating of the viral capsid triggered by a drop in pH or other host factors in the endosomal pathway 91. For HAdVs, the internal capsid protein VI is the membrane lytic factor 80; 81. Upon binding to the viral capsid, α-defensins, including HNP1 and HD5, stabilize HAdV-C and prevent uncoating, release of protein VI, and subsequent disruption of the endosomal membrane 53; 77; 79. To mediate this effect, α-defensins bind directly to the virus, either when mixed together in the absence of cells or when the defensin is added to virus that is pre-bound to receptors on the cell surface 45; 53; 62; 69; 79. Thus, the defensins can recognize the virus in the complexity of host proteins, carbohydrates, and lipids that could potentially compete with the virus for defensin binding. Neutralization of HAdV by α-defensins is restricted to HAdV-B and -C and to a lesser extent to HAdV-A and -E; whereas, HAdV-D and -F infection is either unaffected or enhanced by α-defensins 45; 53. Furthermore, resistance to HD5 neutralization can be conferred to HAdV-C through the replacement of capsid vertex proteins with those from the resistant HAdV-D 45. The basis for enhanced HAdV-D infection is unknown. Moreover, the extent to which the antiviral mechanism against HAdV-C extends to other non-enveloped viruses has not been determined; however, HPV16 entry is also blocked by α-defensins, possibly at an analogous step 54.

Post Entry Neutralization

Infection is not completed by merely penetrating the host cell membrane. Viral transcription, protein production, assembly, and egress must all occur to complete a replicative cycle. These steps present opportunities for defensins to block viral infection, either by targeting the virus specifically or by targeting the cell. In this regard, HNP1 and HD5 are able to block HSV-1 and HSV-2 when added post-entry 44. The defensins accumulated intracellularly in the human cervical epithelial cell line used in this study, indicating that they can still come in contact with the viruses in the cell. Hazrati et al. demonstrate that HNP2 and HD5 can bind HSV-2 DNA and speculate that this could contribute to inhibition by blocking gene expression, although a post-transcription block by an unknown mechanism was also suggested by the data 44.

Among the non-enveloped viruses sensitive to defensins, inhibition of steps after penetration of the cell membrane is not thought to be important for polyomaviruses or HAdV 53; 55. For multiple types of papillomaviruses that are sensitive to HNP1-4 and HD5, the only step known to be inhibited is the nuclear localization of the HPV-16 genome, the last step in the virus entry pathway 54. Unlike the case for HAdV-C neutralization, the HPV genome is exposed under conditions of HNP1 and HD5 neutralization, implying that virus uncoating occurs in the presence of the defensins 53; 54. Thus, it is unclear if defensins block papillomavirus penetration of the host membrane or the ability of the genome to traverse the cytoplasm to the nucleus.

No mechanism but antiviral activity reported

We lack mechanistic insight for a variety of viruses that have been shown to be sensitive to defensin neutralization. Purified HBD3 and porcine β-defensin-3 were antiviral against porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus 49. HBD2 has been shown to reduce the yield of varicella zoster virus at 10 days post-infection, but not at earlier time points 92. Transduction by recombinant adeno-associated virus is inhibited by relatively high concentrations (100 μM) of HNPs; however, ≥100 μM HNPs were measured in epithelial lining fluids from cystic fibrosis patients, which were also inhibitory in the same study 36. And, vaccinia virus is inhibited by HBD3 when incubated with the virus for 24 h 93. Whether previously described or novel mechanisms contribute to the neutralization of these viruses warrants further study.

In addition to purified peptides, virus inhibition by degranulated neutrophils has been noted. When neutrophils degranulate, for example in response to stimulation by leukotriene b4 (LTB4), they release high concentrations of defensins as well as other antimicrobial factors. CMV infection of human peripheral blood leukocytes containing neutrophils is weakly inhibited by LTB4 treatment 94. A combination of α-defensins (HNP1-3), the human cathelicidin LL-37, and eosinophil-derived neurotoxin mediates much of the effect. Cell-free supernatants from LTB4-stimulated neutrophils mixed with CMV was similarly inhibitory, and anti-HNP1-3 antibodies reduced the observed activity by half. These results corroborate the data on modest CMV neutralization using purified α-defensins, although the antiviral mechanism remains unknown 1; 94. In other studies, supernatants from human neutrophils treated with LTB4 or stimulated to synthesize LTB4 strongly inhibited human coronavirus and HSV-1 and more modestly inhibited RSV and influenza B virus 95; 96. Collectively, these studies demonstrate that naturally secreted defensins retain antiviral activity. In contrast, HNP1-3 have been shown to interact with and reduce the activity of surfactant protein D (SP-D) and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid containing SP-D against IAV 97; 98. These observations reinforce the importance of studying both purified peptides for their individual biological effects and more complex mixtures in which defensins and other antimicrobial factors are naturally produced, which could demonstrate synergistic or, alternatively, mutually inhibitory effects.

4. Antiviral mechanisms targeting the cell

Blocking fusion by crosslinking host proteins

Rather than directly targeting viral fusion proteins to block enveloped virus fusion with the host cell, HBD3 and a synthetic human θ-defensin called retrocyclin 2 (RC2) have been shown to inhibit IAV fusion by cross-linking host glycoproteins 42. RC2 and HBD3 binding limit the mobility of host surface proteins in the vicinity of the nascent viral fusion pore, restricting its maturation to full fusion. Inhibition is blocked by serum and by deglycosylation (PNGase treatment) of the cells, indicating that this effect is due to the lectin activity of the defensins. In this regard, a non-defensin mannan-binding lectin had a similar effect. This mechanism may be general, as inhibition is independent of direct binding to the viral hemagglutinin glycoprotein and extends to fusion reactions mediated by unrelated proteins from baculovirus and Sindbis virus. More recently for HIV-1, HNP1 treatment has also been shown to decrease the mobile fraction of CD4, CCR5, and CXCR4 receptors in the cell membrane, reflecting the same phenomenon mediated by the lectin activity of HNP1 47.

Modulation of cell surface receptors

HIV-1 has a complex entry pathway that utilizes several cell surface receptors and co-receptors. The relative ability of defensins to directly modulate host surface receptors important for HIV-1 infection has been debated by various groups. In peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and a human T cell line expressing CXCR4 and CCR5, HBD2 and HBD3 but not HBD1 reduced cell surface expression of CXCR4 but not CCR5 in 0–0.5% serum 52; 99. A subsequent study confirmed CXCR4 downregulation in PBMCs by HBD2 and HNP1 under similar conditions 71. In contrast, the downmodulation of CXCR4 was not observed in PBMCs treated with HBD2 in the presence of serum 61; 72. Similarly, in primary CD4+ T cells in the presence of 10% serum, HNP1 does not alter CXCR4, CCR5, or CD4 expression on the cell surface 73. Discrepancies among these studies are likely explained by the use of different cell types, serum concentrations, and experimental conditions. In addition, effects on receptor down-regulation do not always correspond with the broad antiviral activities of the defensins against multiple HIV-1 isolates using different co-receptors100. Thus, the contribution of changes in cell surface receptor levels to HIV-1 infection remains unresolved.

Changes in intracellular signaling that impact infection

Many viruses regulate protein kinase C (PKC) signaling during entry and infection: HIV-1 requires phosphorylated PKC for viral fusion, transcription, integration, and assembly 73; 101; 102. IAV requires PKC for endosomal escape and nuclear entry 103; 104. HSV requires PKC for cell entry as well as for nuclear egress of the viral capsid 105; 106. As HNP1-3 are known to inhibit the activity of PKC in vitro 107, altering or inhibiting this cellular signaling pathway may be another defensin-mediated antiviral mechanism, which explains the post-entry block to infection observed for some viruses. HNP1 treatment of cells prior to or during infection with either IAV or HIV-1 reduces the levels of phosphorylated PKC 48; 73. Treatment of CD4+ T cells with a PKC activator, bryostatin-1, partially rescued HIV-1 infection 73. In addition, HNP1 and the PKC inhibitor Go6976 had similar inhibition kinetics 73. Inhibition of PKC by HNP1 explains the observed block in nuclear import of the incoming pre-integration complex as well as transcription of the integrated viral genome in HIV-1 infected cells 73. Although HSV infection is also inhibited by HNP1 through a post entry mechanism, it is not rescued by pretreatment with bryostatin-1 44. In addition, cellular entry of some HAdV serotypes is also sensitive to PKC inhibition 108; 109; 110; however, differential defensin sensitivity of chimeric HAdVs in which only certain capsid proteins are variable argues against a role for cellular targets such as PKC in HAdV neutralization by α-defensins 45. Together, these data indicate that the PKC signaling pathway is involved in defensin mediated neutralization of HIV and possibly IAV, but is uninvolved in HSV and HAdV neutralization.

Cell signaling pathways mediated by the chemokine receptor CCR6 also play a role in defensin-mediated HIV inhibition. HBD2 is known to bind CCR6 and has been shown to induce expression of host restriction factor apolipoprotein B mRNA-editing enzyme-catalytic polypeptide-like 3G (APOBEC3G) which has antiviral activity against HIV 100; 111. Thus, defensins can both inhibit cellular pathways required for viral infection and activate intracellular antiviral mechanisms.

5. Defensins expression or secretion elicited by viral infection

In addition to their direct antiviral properties, many defensins function as cytokines or chemokines to elaborate an antimicrobial immune response, which could indirectly affect viral pathogenesis. In this regard, a number of viruses have been shown to stimulate defensin expression or secretion, whether or not the elicited defensins are directly antiviral against that virus. This has primarily been observed for β-defensins, which are often inducibly expressed, rather than the constitutively expressed α-defensins 11. For example, HBD2 and HBD3 mRNA were upregulated in primary bronchial epithelial cells by human rhinovirus-16 (HRV-16) infection 112. A subsequent study confirmed the mRNA upregulation and demonstrated increased HBD2 protein production 39. Both studies found that viral replication was required and that poly(I:C) but not ssRNA could mimic viral infection, implicating a requirement for innate intracellular RNA detection pathways (RIG-I-like receptors)113. Consistent with this observation, multiple HRV serotypes that enter via distinct receptors and pathways had similar defensin-inducing properties 39. Despite potent upregulation of HBD2, direct inactivation of HRV-16 was not observed 39. IL-17A stimulation of HRV-16 infected bronchial epithelial cells synergistically induces HBD2, although the signaling pathways leading to HBD2 upregulation by these two stimuli only partially overlap 114. When HBD2 upregulation was monitored in human volunteers following experimental HRV-16 infection, one group found elevated HBD2 message in nasal epithelial scrapings and HBD2 protein in nasal lavage following a one day lag from onset of symptoms 39; however, a second group observed low HBD2 levels and an increase in HBD2 protein in sputum only on days 15–21 post-infection 115. These discrepancies may reflect differences in the patient samples that were monitored.

For paramyxoviruses, infection of neonatal lambs with ovine parainfluenza virus 3 (PIV3) elevated sheep β-defensin 1 (SBD1) mRNA in the lung 4-7-fold compared to saline controls. PIV3 causes a lower respiratory infection in lambs similar to that of human PIV in children, and SBD1 is expressed and distributed similarly to HBD1 116. Increased inflammation and PIV3 infection due to concurrent HAdV vector infection led to further increases in SBD1 expression 117. In contrast, bovine RSV infection of sheep did not significantly affect SBD1 expression 118. Thus, repair and regeneration during resolution and recovery from inflammation rather than acute inflammation due to viral infection may be more associated with SBD1 upregulation 118. The direct antiviral activity of SBD1 against these pathogens was not assessed. In studies of RSV infection of human A549 respiratory epithelial cells, HBD2 message and protein were both upregulated in an NF-κB-dependent manner 74. Increased HBD2 expression resulted from the induction of TNF-α production upon RSV infection and replication. This pathway may be relevant in vivo, as mice challenged intranasally with RSV expressed increased amounts of murine β-defensin 4 (MBD4) but not MBD3, both of which are homologs of HBD2 15; 74. In these studies, the elicited HBD2 was also shown to be directly antiviral by disrupting virion integrity, as discussed in Section 3. In addition, HNP1-3 levels were elevated in tracheal aspirates of infants infected with RSV during acute illness compared to convalescence 119. By correcting for total phospholipid content in their samples, the authors suggest that increased neutrophil infiltration alone does not explain the elevated α-defensin levels, rather increased production may also contribute 119. These α-defensins likely contribute to the anti-RSV activity of degranulated neutrophils, but the effect of purified HNPs on RSV was not addressed in either study 95; 119.

HIV-1 infection in epithelial cells transcriptionally upregulates HBD2 and HBD3, which neutralize HIV-1, but not HBD1, which does not block HIV-1 infection 52. In HaCaT human keratinocytes, vaccinia virus infection has been shown to stimulate the expression of HBD3, to which the virus is sensitive 93. HSV-2 infection in keratinocytes induces HBD1 and HBD4, and HBD1 does not block HSV-2 infection 120. Furthermore, human PBMCs, plasmacytoid DCs (pDCs), and purified monocytes increase HBD1 at the RNA and protein level after HSV-1, IAV and Sendai virus infection 121. UV inactivated virus is less stimulatory, indicating a role for replication. Similarly, IAV infection of mice induces expression of MBD3 and MBD4 in the nasosinus, trachea, and lungs and MBD1 and MBD2 in the lungs 122; 123. Overexpression of MBD3 in MDCK cells or addition of recombinant MBD2 during infection inhibits IAV infection in cell culture 123; 124. In summary, many studies have documented the induction of defensin expression as a consequence of viral infection, and the induced defensins may play both direct and indirect roles in viral pathogenesis.

6. Importance of defensins in viral pathogenesis in vivo

Most of the work demonstrating the antiviral effect of defensins has been in cell culture. Although there has been one study showing an increase in lethality from IAV infection in a MBD1 knockout mouse, those results are attributed to an increase in inflammation in the knockout mice rather than direct inhibition of viral replication 121. Similarly, administration of rhesus θ-defensin protected mice from lethal SARS-coronavirus challenge without affecting lung viral titers, likely due to a reduction in immunopathology in the treated animals 125. In fact, there is no example of a direct role for endogenous defensins in blocking virus infection in vivo, in large part due to the lack of a complete defensin knockout animal model. Indirect evidence for the importance of defensins in vivo comes from association studies looking at defensin levels during various viral disease states. For example, patients with atopic dermatitis have reduced cathelicidin and β-defensins and are at greater risk of developing eczema vaccinatum 126; 127; 128; 129. HIV-1 transmission across the oral epithelium of adults is rare, and the expression of HBD2 and HBD3 in adult but not fetal oral epithelial cells may contribute to this resistance by inactivating HIV-1 as it crosses the epithelial barrier 130. And, HIV-1 positive women have lower HNP1-3 levels and lower anti-HSV-2 activity in their cervicovaginal lavage fluid compared to healthy controls 33. Similarly, cervicovaginal lavage fluid levels of HNP1-3 correlate with the anti-HIV-1 activity of the fluid 34. Production of HNP1-3 mRNA and protein in monocyte-derived DCs is higher in HIV-1 infected individuals compared to healthy non-infected controls 131. And, the CD4+ T cell counts in those individuals with higher levels of defensin decreased more slowly than the individuals with lower levels of defensin. α-defensins are also detectable in the breast milk of HIV-1 infected mothers, although levels vary from approximately 0.1–7 nM, and are positively correlated with levels of HIV-1 RNA; however, the presence of α-defensins is also positively correlated with higher maternal CD4+ T cell counts and a decrease in the risk of HIV transmission from the breastfeeding mother to her infant 132; 133. The apparent contradiction between higher α-defensin levels correlating to higher HIV viral titers and yet lower transmission might be explained by the fact that the defensin levels were also correlated with a healthier maternal immune system, as indicated by the increased CD4+ T cell count. Alternatively, HIV-1 infection may be stimulating α-defensin expression and secretion. Thus, α-defensin levels in HIV-1 infected individuals are correlated with control of viral infection, slowed disease progression, and lower vertical transmission. Additional evidence for a contribution of defensins to HIV-1 transmission and disease progression has been reviewed elsewhere 4; 5; 61; 134; 135.

In addition to their direct antimicrobial activity, defensins are able to augment and direct the immune response to viruses in ways that impact the outcome and resolution of infection. The myriad of mechanisms by which defensins can be immunomodulatory has been reviewed elsewhere 136; 137; 138, but for the purposes of this review we will summarize those activities which are likely relevant for viral infections. Neutrophil and enteric α-defensins have been found to selectively chemoattract different subsets of T lymphocytes, macrophages, and immature DCs 16; 139; 140; 141. Although the chemokine receptor used by α-defensins has not been identified, the recruitment of these immune cell subsets to the site of viral infection undoubtedly contributes to the outcome of viral infections. For the β-defensins, HBD1-4 induced chemotaxis of macrophages, while HBD1 and HBD2 also induce chemotaxis of immature DCs and memory T cells 111; 142. This recruitment has been shown to occur via direct binding and activation of the chemokine receptors CCR6 and CCR2 111; 143. However, a conflicting paper indicates that although HBD1-4 can all induce the chemotaxis of macrophages, they only weakly recruit DCs 142. In addition, they found that this effect is independent of CCR6 142. Overall, the ability of HBDs to control immune cell chemotaxis and therefore regulate immune responses to viral infections is well established, even if there remains debate about the specific cell subsets that are recruited.

The recruitment of immune cells has been shown to be relevant in vivo, as both recombinant and naturally produced defensins augment adaptive immune responses. Intranasal inoculation of mice with ovalbumin (OVA) in combination with HNP1-3 resulted in an increase OVA specific IgG and IgM titers compared to mice that received OVA alone 144. However, despite mucosal inoculation, no OVA specific IgA was observed, indicating that the HNP augmentation may not allow for class switching. A subsequent study co-administered OVA intranasally with HNP1, HNP2, HBD1, or HBD2 individually and found that the predominant IgG isotypes and interleukin profiles were unique to the defensin used, highlighting the complexity of the interaction between defensins and immune cells 145. Finally, the augmented immune response has been shown to be functionally relevant, as intraperitoneal injection of HNPs enhanced the antibody response to a syngeneic tumor challenge and increased the survival time of mice after tumor challenge 146. Thus, although not yet shown in the context of an infectious challenge, stimulation of the adaptive immune response by defensins likely contributes to antiviral immunity.

In addition to inducing antibody secretion, direct contact with defensins can activate immune cells and induce cytokine secretion. For neutrophils, HNP1 and HBD3 suppress apoptosis via inhibition of caspase 3, which could help to prolong an immune response 147; 148. HNP1, HNP2, and HD5 have also been shown to increase neutrophil uptake of IAV 82. In regards to DCs, exposure to MBD2 matures and activates DCs through direct binding to TLR4, and HBD3 activates myeloid DCs and monocytes via TLR1 and TLR2 149; 150. HBD3 can also activate Langerhans cell-like DCs and primary human cutaneous DCs 151. In addition, HNP1 and HBD1 promote the activation and maturation of monocyte-derived DCs and production of pro-inflammatory cytokines 152. Defensins can elicit pro-inflammatory cytokine production from treated cells that could then stimulate DCs 8; 153; 154. Moreover, HNP1 and HNP2 have also been shown to induce CC-chemokine expression and secretion in macrophages, which block HIV infection 155. Therefore, some of the activation of antigen expressing cells could be explained through an indirect mechanism.

There is also increasing evidence that defensins can be immunosuppressive. Some defensins, notably HBD1, are constitutively expressed at epithelial surfaces 156. It has been speculated that this constitutive expression minimizes the effects of exposure to low levels of commensal and pathogenic microbes and allows for the maintenance of a non-inflammatory environment 157. This idea is supported by the fact that HBD3 can suppress the lipopolysaccharide-induced production of pro-inflammatory cytokines by human and mouse macrophages 158; 159. It is worth noting that the amount of HBD3 used in these studies (1 uM), is lower than the amount of HBD3 that has been shown to activate macrophages via TLRs or neutralize HIV-1 infection (4 uM) 72; 150; 158. More recently, naturally expressed and exogenous HBD3 were also shown to reduce the innate immune response to lentiviral vector transduction of muscle cells 160. Finally, in line with previous observations about the cathelicidin LL37, HBD2 and HBD3 can bind DNA and promote its uptake by plasmacytoid DCs leading to interferon production 161; 162. Overall, α- and β-defensins function to augment and alter the immune responses to microbes, and the response elicited is likely dependent upon the amount of microbial stimuli and the subsequent concentration of defensin that is produced.

7. Conclusions and Perspectives

In cell culture, both α- and β-defensins have been shown to be potently antiviral against a wide range of viral species. However, there are intriguing differences in viral neutralization when one begins to examine the interactions of individual defensins with viruses, even those from the same genus. Identification of the viral determinants that drive these differences is an area in need of further study. We now appreciate that α-defensins inhibit viruses by numerous mechanisms; however, mechanistic data involving β-defensins is mostly lacking, and would add greatly to the understanding of how defensins can impact an immune response in vivo. This is especially true as β-defensins are inducibly produced by epithelial cells in response to microbial stimuli, and therefore could provide a first line of defense against many infecting viruses. Although we have focused on antiviral mechanisms, enhancement of HIV-1 and HAdV-D, -E, -F infection by defensins has been observed. Whether this enhancement extends to other viruses and the importance of this enhancement for infection needs to be explored. Finally, the in vivo relevance of direct defensin killing and enhancement is unclear. A lack of complete defensin knockout models hinders these studies, which need to be addressed in order to fully understand the role of defensins in viral pathogenesis. There is great interest in the potential of defensins as vaccine adjuvants and as templates for the design of novel antiviral treatments 163; 164; 165. However, for these applications to be both safe and efficacious a greater understanding of the complex roles of defensins in viral infection is needed.

Highlights.

  • Defensins are active against both enveloped and non-enveloped viruses

  • Targets include: viral envelopes, glycoproteins, and capsids or host cells

  • multiple antiviral mechanisms have been described

  • They can also alter immune responses to affect pathogenesis

  • Their role in viral pathogenesis in vivo is understudied

Acknowledgments

S.S.W. and M.E.W. were supported in part by Public Health Service, National Research Service Award, T32 GM07270, from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences. S.S.W. was supported in part by Public Health Service, National Research Service Award, T32 AI083203, from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Footnotes

1

Abbreviations: CMV, cytomegalovirus; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; HPIV, human parainfluenza virus; HSV, herpes simplex virus; IAV, influenza A virus; RSV, respiratory syncytial virus; VSV, vesicular stomatitis virus; VV, vaccinia virus; VZV, varicella zoster virus; AAV, adeno-associated virus; HAdV, human adenovirus; HPV, human papillomavirus; PyV, polyomavirus; BKV, BK virus; JCV, JC virus; SV40, simian virus 40; HRV, human rhinovirus; HNP, human neutrophil peptide; NK, natural killer; DC, dendritic cell; HBD, human β-defensin; Abu, α-amino-n-butyric acid; PKC, protein kinase C; SBD, sheep β-defensin; MBD, mouse β-defensin; pDC, plasmacytoid dendritic cell; OVA, ovalbumin; SP-D, surfactant protein D; PBMC, peripheral blood mononuclear cell

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

References

  • 1.Daher KA, Selsted ME, Lehrer RI. Direct inactivation of viruses by human granulocyte defensins. J Virol. 1986;60:1068–74. doi: 10.1128/jvi.60.3.1068-1074.1986. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Lehrer RI, Daher K, Ganz T, Selsted ME. Direct inactivation of viruses by MCP-1 and MCP-2, natural peptide antibiotics from rabbit leukocytes. J Virol. 1985;54:467–72. doi: 10.1128/jvi.54.2.467-472.1985. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Ganz T, Selsted ME, Szklarek D, Harwig SS, Daher K, Bainton DF, Lehrer RI. Defensins. Natural peptide antibiotics of human neutrophils. J Clin Invest. 1985;76:1427–35. doi: 10.1172/JCI112120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Shah R, Chang TL. Small Wonders: Peptides for Disease Control. Vol. 1095. American Chemical Society; 2012. Defensins in Viral Infection; pp. 137–171. 0 vols. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Klotman ME, Chang TL. Defensins in innate antiviral immunity. Nat Rev Immunol. 2006;6:447–56. doi: 10.1038/nri1860. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Ding J, Chou YY, Chang TL. Defensins in viral infections. J Innate Immun. 2009;1:413–20. doi: 10.1159/000226256. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Gwyer Findlay E, Currie SM, Davidson DJ. Cationic Host Defence Peptides: Potential as Antiviral Therapeutics. BioDrugs. 2013 doi: 10.1007/s40259-013-0039-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Lehrer RI, Lu W. alpha-Defensins in human innate immunity. Immunol Rev. 2012;245:84–112. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-065X.2011.01082.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Hazlett L, Wu M. Defensins in innate immunity. Cell Tissue Res. 2011;343:175–88. doi: 10.1007/s00441-010-1022-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Lehrer RI. Multispecific myeloid defensins. Curr Opin Hematol. 2007;14:16–21. doi: 10.1097/00062752-200701000-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Selsted ME, Ouellette AJ. Mammalian defensins in the antimicrobial immune response. Nat Immunol. 2005;6:551–7. doi: 10.1038/ni1206. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Ganz T. Defensins: antimicrobial peptides of innate immunity. Nat Rev Immunol. 2003;3:710–20. doi: 10.1038/nri1180. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Pazgier M, Li X, Lu W, Lubkowski J. Human defensins: synthesis and structural properties. Curr Pharm Des. 2007;13:3096–118. doi: 10.2174/138161207782110381. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Penberthy WT, Chari S, Cole AL, Cole AM. Retrocyclins and their activity against HIV-1. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2011;68:2231–42. doi: 10.1007/s00018-011-0715-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Schutte BC, Mitros JP, Bartlett JA, Walters JD, Jia HP, Welsh MJ, Casavant TL, McCray PB., Jr Discovery of five conserved beta -defensin gene clusters using a computational search strategy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002;99:2129–33. doi: 10.1073/pnas.042692699. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Szyk A, Wu Z, Tucker K, Yang D, Lu W, Lubkowski J. Crystal structures of human alpha-defensins HNP4, HD5, and HD6. Protein Sci. 2006;15:2749–60. doi: 10.1110/ps.062336606. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Hill CP, Yee J, Selsted ME, Eisenberg D. Crystal structure of defensin HNP-3, an amphiphilic dimer: mechanisms of membrane permeabilization. Science. 1991;251:1481–5. doi: 10.1126/science.2006422. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Pardi A, Zhang XL, Selsted ME, Skalicky JJ, Yip PF. NMR studies of defensin antimicrobial peptides. 2. Three-dimensional structures of rabbit NP-2 and human HNP-1. Biochemistry. 1992;31:11357–64. doi: 10.1021/bi00161a013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Hristova K, Selsted ME, White SH. Interactions of monomeric rabbit neutrophil defensins with bilayers: comparison with dimeric human defensin HNP-2. Biochemistry. 1996;35:11888–94. doi: 10.1021/bi961100d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Ouellette AJ. Paneth cell alpha-defensins in enteric innate immunity. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2011;68:2215–29. doi: 10.1007/s00018-011-0714-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Bevins CL, Salzman NH. Paneth cells, antimicrobial peptides and maintenance of intestinal homeostasis. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2011;9:356–68. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro2546. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Spencer JD, Hains DS, Porter E, Bevins CL, DiRosario J, Becknell B, Wang H, Schwaderer AL. Human alpha defensin 5 expression in the human kidney and urinary tract. PLoS One. 2012;7:e31712. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0031712. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Quayle AJ, Porter EM, Nussbaum AA, Wang YM, Brabec C, Yip KP, Mok SC. Gene expression, immunolocalization, and secretion of human defensin-5 in human female reproductive tract. Am J Pathol. 1998;152:1247–58. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Com E, Bourgeon F, Evrard B, Ganz T, Colleu D, Jegou B, Pineau C. Expression of antimicrobial defensins in the male reproductive tract of rats, mice, and humans. Biol Reprod. 2003;68:95–104. doi: 10.1095/biolreprod.102.005389. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Svinarich DM, Wolf NA, Gomez R, Gonik B, Romero R. Detection of human defensin 5 in reproductive tissues. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;176:470–5. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(97)70517-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Pazgier M, Hoover DM, Yang D, Lu W, Lubkowski J. Human beta-defensins. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2006;63:1294–313. doi: 10.1007/s00018-005-5540-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Schibli DJ, Hunter HN, Aseyev V, Starner TD, Wiencek JM, McCray PB, Jr, Tack BF, Vogel HJ. The solution structures of the human beta-defensins lead to a better understanding of the potent bactericidal activity of HBD3 against Staphylococcus aureus. J Biol Chem. 2002;277:8279–89. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M108830200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Yamaguchi Y, Nagase T, Makita R, Fukuhara S, Tomita T, Tominaga T, Kurihara H, Ouchi Y. Identification of multiple novel epididymis-specific beta-defensin isoforms in humans and mice. J Immunol. 2002;169:2516–23. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.169.5.2516. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Shanahan MT, Tanabe H, Ouellette AJ. Strain-specific polymorphisms in Paneth cell alpha-defensins of C57BL/6 mice and evidence of vestigial myeloid alpha-defensin pseudogenes. Infect Immun. 2011;79:459–73. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00996-10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Eisenhauer PB, Lehrer RI. Mouse neutrophils lack defensins. Infect Immun. 1992;60:3446–7. doi: 10.1128/iai.60.8.3446-3447.1992. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Ayabe T, Satchell DP, Wilson CL, Parks WC, Selsted ME, Ouellette AJ. Secretion of microbicidal alpha-defensins by intestinal Paneth cells in response to bacteria. Nat Immunol. 2000;1:113–8. doi: 10.1038/77783. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Wehkamp J, Chu H, Shen B, Feathers RW, Kays RJ, Lee SK, Bevins CL. Paneth cell antimicrobial peptides: topographical distribution and quantification in human gastrointestinal tissues. FEBS Lett. 2006;580:5344–50. doi: 10.1016/j.febslet.2006.08.083. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.John M, Keller MJ, Fam EH, Cheshenko N, Hogarty K, Kasowitz A, Wallenstein S, Carlucci MJ, Tuyama AC, Lu W, Klotman ME, Lehrer RI, Herold BC. Cervicovaginal secretions contribute to innate resistance to herpes simplex virus infection. J Infect Dis. 2005;192:1731–40. doi: 10.1086/497168. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Levinson P, Kaul R, Kimani J, Ngugi E, Moses S, MacDonald KS, Broliden K, Hirbod T, Kibera HIVSG. Levels of innate immune factors in genital fluids: association of alpha defensins and LL-37 with genital infections and increased HIV acquisition. AIDS. 2009;23:309–17. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0b013e328321809c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Fan SR, Liu XP, Liao QP. Human defensins and cytokines in vaginal lavage fluid of women with bacterial vaginosis. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2008;103:50–4. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.05.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Virella-Lowell I, Poirier A, Chesnut KA, Brantly M, Flotte TR. Inhibition of recombinant adeno-associated virus (rAAV) transduction by bronchial secretions from cystic fibrosis patients. Gene Ther. 2000;7:1783–9. doi: 10.1038/sj.gt.3301268. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Cole AM, Liao HI, Stuchlik O, Tilan J, Pohl J, Ganz T. Cationic polypeptides are required for antibacterial activity of human airway fluid. J Immunol. 2002;169:6985–91. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.169.12.6985. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Gardner MS, Rowland MD, Siu AY, Bundy JL, Wagener DK, Stephenson JL. Comprehensive defensin assay for saliva. Anal Chem. 2009;81:557–66. doi: 10.1021/ac801609r. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Proud D, Sanders SP, Wiehler S. Human rhinovirus infection induces airway epithelial cell production of human beta-defensin 2 both in vitro and in vivo. J Immunol. 2004;172:4637–45. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.172.7.4637. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Wimley WC, Selsted ME, White SH. Interactions between human defensins and lipid bilayers: evidence for formation of multimeric pores. Protein Sci. 1994;3:1362–73. doi: 10.1002/pro.5560030902. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Lehrer RI, Jung G, Ruchala P, Andre S, Gabius HJ, Lu W. Multivalent binding of carbohydrates by the human alpha-defensin, HD5. J Immunol. 2009;183:480–90. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.0900244. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Leikina E, Delanoe-Ayari H, Melikov K, Cho MS, Chen A, Waring AJ, Wang W, Xie Y, Loo JA, Lehrer RI, Chernomordik LV. Carbohydrate-binding molecules inhibit viral fusion and entry by crosslinking membrane glycoproteins. Nat Immunol. 2005;6:995–1001. doi: 10.1038/ni1248. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Wang W, Owen SM, Rudolph DL, Cole AM, Hong T, Waring AJ, Lal RB, Lehrer RI. Activity of alpha- and theta-defensins against primary isolates of HIV-1. J Immunol. 2004;173:515–20. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.173.1.515. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Hazrati E, Galen B, Lu W, Wang W, Ouyang Y, Keller MJ, Lehrer RI, Herold BC. Human alpha- and beta-defensins block multiple steps in herpes simplex virus infection. J Immunol. 2006;177:8658–66. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.177.12.8658. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Smith JG, Silvestry M, Lindert S, Lu W, Nemerow GR, Stewart PL. Insight into the mechanisms of adenovirus capsid disassembly from studies of defensin neutralization. PLoS Pathog. 2010;6:e1000959. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1000959. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Rapista A, Ding J, Benito B, Lo YT, Neiditch MB, Lu W, Chang TL. Human defensins 5 and 6 enhance HIV-1 infectivity through promoting HIV attachment. Retrovirology. 2011;8:45. doi: 10.1186/1742-4690-8-45. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Demirkhanyan LH, Marin M, Padilla-Parra S, Zhan C, Miyauchi K, Jean-Baptiste M, Novitskiy G, Lu W, Melikyan GB. Multifaceted mechanisms of HIV-1 entry inhibition by human alpha-defensin. J Biol Chem. 2012;287:28821–38. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M112.375949. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Salvatore M, Garcia-Sastre A, Ruchala P, Lehrer RI, Chang T, Klotman ME. alpha-Defensin inhibits influenza virus replication by cell-mediated mechanism(s) J Infect Dis. 2007;196:835–43. doi: 10.1086/521027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Sang Y, Ruchala P, Lehrer RI, Ross CR, Rowland RR, Blecha F. Antimicrobial host defense peptides in an arteriviral infection: differential peptide expression and virus inactivation. Viral Immunol. 2009;22:235–42. doi: 10.1089/vim.2009.0005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Scudiero O, Galdiero S, Cantisani M, Di Noto R, Vitiello M, Galdiero M, Naclerio G, Cassiman JJ, Pedone C, Castaldo G, Salvatore F. Novel synthetic, salt-resistant analogs of human beta-defensins 1 and 3 endowed with enhanced antimicrobial activity. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010 doi: 10.1128/AAC.01550-09. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Mackewicz CE, Yuan J, Tran P, Diaz L, Mack E, Selsted ME, Levy JA. alpha-Defensins can have anti-HIV activity but are not CD8 cell anti-HIV factors. Aids. 2003;17:F23–32. doi: 10.1097/00002030-200309260-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Quinones-Mateu ME, Lederman MM, Feng Z, Chakraborty B, Weber J, Rangel HR, Marotta ML, Mirza M, Jiang B, Kiser P, Medvik K, Sieg SF, Weinberg A. Human epithelial beta-defensins 2 and 3 inhibit HIV-1 replication. Aids. 2003;17:F39–48. doi: 10.1097/00002030-200311070-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Smith JG, Nemerow GR. Mechanism of adenovirus neutralization by human alpha-defensins. Cell Host Microbe. 2008;3:11–19. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2007.12.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Buck CB, Day PM, Thompson CD, Lubkowski J, Lu W, Lowy DR, Schiller JT. Human alpha-defensins block papillomavirus infection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006;103:1516–21. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0508033103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Dugan AS, Maginnis MS, Jordan JA, Gasparovic ML, Manley K, Page R, Williams G, Porter E, O’Hara BA, Atwood WJ. Human alpha-defensins inhibit BK virus infection by aggregating virions and blocking binding to host cells. J Biol Chem. 2008;283:31125–32. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M805902200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Ding J, Tasker C, Valere K, Lu W, Chang T. Anti-HIV activity of human defensin 5 in primary CD4+ T cells under serum-deprived conditions is a consequence of defensin-mediated cytotoxicity. PLoS One. 2013 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0076038. in press. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Furci L, Tolazzi M, Sironi F, Vassena L, Lusso P. Inhibition of HIV-1 infection by human alpha-defensin-5, a natural antimicrobial peptide expressed in the genital and intestinal mucosae. PLoS One. 2012;7:e45208. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0045208. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Lu W, de Leeuw E. Pro-inflammatory and pro-Apoptotic Properties of Human Defensin 5. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2013 doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2013.06.015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Harder J, Bartels J, Christophers E, Schroder JM. Isolation and characterization of human beta-defensin-3, a novel human inducible peptide antibiotic. J Biol Chem. 2001;276:5707–13. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M008557200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Weinberg A, Quinones-Mateu ME, Lederman MM. Role of human beta-defensins in HIV infection. Adv Dent Res. 2006;19:42–8. doi: 10.1177/154407370601900109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Garzino-Demo A. Chemokines and defensins as HIV suppressive factors: an evolving story. Curr Pharm Des. 2007;13:163–72. doi: 10.2174/138161207779313696. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Gounder AP, Wiens ME, Wilson SS, Lu W, Smith JG. Critical determinants of human alpha-defensin 5 activity against non-enveloped viruses. J Biol Chem. 2012;287:24554–62. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M112.354068. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Xie C, Prahl A, Ericksen B, Wu Z, Zeng P, Li X, Lu WY, Lubkowski J, Lu W. Reconstruction of the conserved beta-bulge in mammalian defensins using D-amino acids. J Biol Chem. 2005;280:32921–9. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M503084200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Klotman ME, Rapista A, Teleshova N, Micsenyi A, Jarvis GA, Lu W, Porter E, Chang TL. Neisseria gonorrhoeae-Induced Human Defensins 5 and 6 Increase HIV Infectivity: Role in Enhanced Transmission. J Immunol. 2008;180:6176–85. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.180.9.6176. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Pazgier M, Wei G, Ericksen B, Jung G, Wu Z, de Leeuw E, Yuan W, Szmacinski H, Lu WY, Lubkowski J, Lehrer RI, Lu W. Sometimes it takes two to tango: contributions of dimerization to functions of human alpha-defensin HNP1 peptide. J Biol Chem. 2012;287:8944–53. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M111.332205. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Wei G, Pazgier M, de Leeuw E, Rajabi M, Li J, Zou G, Jung G, Yuan W, Lu WY, Lehrer RI, Lu W. Trp-26 imparts functional versatility to human alpha-defensin HNP1. J Biol Chem. 2010;285:16275–85. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M110.102749. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Wang A, Chen F, Wang Y, Shen M, Xu Y, Hu J, Wang S, Geng F, Wang C, Ran X, Su Y, Cheng T, Wang J. Enhancement of Antiviral Activity of Human Alpha-Defensin 5 against Herpes Simplex Virus 2 by Arginine Mutagenesis at Adaptive Evolution Sites. J Virol. 2013;87:2835–45. doi: 10.1128/JVI.02209-12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Furci L, Sironi F, Tolazzi M, Vassena L, Lusso P. Alpha-defensins block the early steps of HIV-1 infection: interference with the binding of gp120 to CD4. Blood. 2007;109:2928–35. doi: 10.1182/blood-2006-05-024489. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Flatt JW, Kim R, Smith JG, Nemerow GR, Stewart PL. An intrinsically disordered region of the adenovirus capsid is implicated in neutralization by human alpha defensin 5. PLoS One. 2013;8:e61571. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061571. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Nakashima H, Yamamoto N, Masuda M, Fujii N. Defensins inhibit HIV replication in vitro. AIDS. 1993;7:1129. doi: 10.1097/00002030-199308000-00019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Seidel A, Ye Y, de Armas LR, Soto M, Yarosh W, Marcsisin RA, Tran D, Selsted ME, Camerini D. Cyclic and acyclic defensins inhibit human immunodeficiency virus type-1 replication by different mechanisms. PLoS One. 2010;5:e9737. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009737. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Sun L, Finnegan CM, Kish-Catalone T, Blumenthal R, Garzino-Demo P, La Terra Maggiore GM, Berrone S, Kleinman C, Wu Z, Abdelwahab S, Lu W, Garzino-Demo A. Human beta-defensins suppress human immunodeficiency virus infection: potential role in mucosal protection. J Virol. 2005;79:14318–29. doi: 10.1128/JVI.79.22.14318-14329.2005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Chang TL, Vargas J, Jr, DelPortillo A, Klotman ME. Dual role of alpha-defensin-1 in anti-HIV-1 innate immunity. J Clin Invest. 2005;115:765–73. doi: 10.1172/JCI200521948. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Kota S, Sabbah A, Chang TH, Harnack R, Xiang Y, Meng X, Bose S. Role of human beta-defensin-2 during tumor necrosis factor-alpha/NF-kappaB-mediated innate antiviral response against human respiratory syncytial virus. J Biol Chem. 2008;283:22417–29. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M710415200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Fujii G, Selsted ME, Eisenberg D. Defensins promote fusion and lysis of negatively charged membranes. Protein Sci. 1993;2:1301–12. doi: 10.1002/pro.5560020813. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Nayak DP, Hui EK. The role of lipid microdomains in virus biology. Subcell Biochem. 2004;37:443–91. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4757-5806-1_14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Snijder J, Reddy VS, May ER, Roos WH, Nemerow GR, Wuite GJ. Integrin and defensin modulate the mechanical properties of adenovirus. J Virol. 2013;87:2756–66. doi: 10.1128/JVI.02516-12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Perez-Berna AJ, Ortega-Esteban A, Menendez-Conejero R, Winkler DC, Menendez M, Steven AC, Flint SJ, de Pablo PJ, San Martin C. The role of capsid maturation on adenovirus priming for sequential uncoating. J Biol Chem. 2012;287:31582–95. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M112.389957. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Nguyen EK, Nemerow GR, Smith JG. Direct evidence from single-cell analysis that human alpha-defensins block adenovirus uncoating to neutralize infection. J Virol. 2010;84:4041–9. doi: 10.1128/JVI.02471-09. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Moyer CL, Wiethoff CM, Maier O, Smith JG, Nemerow GR. Functional genetic and biophysical analyses of membrane disruption by human adenovirus. J Virol. 2011;85:2631–41. doi: 10.1128/JVI.02321-10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Wiethoff CM, Wodrich H, Gerace L, Nemerow GR. Adenovirus protein VI mediates membrane disruption following capsid disassembly. J Virol. 2005;79:1992–2000. doi: 10.1128/JVI.79.4.1992-2000.2005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Tecle T, White MR, Gantz D, Crouch EC, Hartshorn KL. Human neutrophil defensins increase neutrophil uptake of influenza a virus and bacteria and modify virus-induced respiratory burst responses. J Immunol. 2007;178:8046–52. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.12.8046. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Yasin B, Wang W, Pang M, Cheshenko N, Hong T, Waring AJ, Herold BC, Wagar EA, Lehrer RI. Theta defensins protect cells from infection by herpes simplex virus by inhibiting viral adhesion and entry. J Virol. 2004;78:5147–56. doi: 10.1128/JVI.78.10.5147-5156.2004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Wu Z, Cocchi F, Gentles D, Ericksen B, Lubkowski J, Devico A, Lehrer RI, Lu W. Human neutrophil alpha-defensin 4 inhibits HIV-1 infection in vitro. FEBS Lett. 2005;579:162–6. doi: 10.1016/j.febslet.2004.11.062. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Wang CH, Chan LW, Johnson RN, Chu DS, Shi J, Schellinger JG, Lieber A, Pun SH. The transduction of Coxsackie and Adenovirus Receptor-negative cells and protection against neutralizing antibodies by HPMA-co-oligolysine copolymer-coated adenovirus. Biomaterials. 2011;32:9536–45. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.08.069. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Harrison SC. Viral membrane fusion. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2008;15:690–8. doi: 10.1038/nsmb.1456. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Weissenhorn W, Hinz A, Gaudin\ Y. Virus membrane fusion. FEBS Lett. 2007 doi: 10.1016/j.febslet.2007.01.093. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Klasse PJ. The molecular basis of HIV entry. Cellular Microbiology. 2012;14:1183–1192. doi: 10.1111/j.1462-5822.2012.01812.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Demirkhanyan L, Marin M, Lu W, Melikyan GB. Sub-Inhibitory Concentrations of Human alpha-defensin Potentiate Neutralizing Antibodies against HIV-1 gp41 Pre-Hairpin Intermediates in the Presence of Serum. PLoS Pathog. 2013;9:e1003431. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1003431. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Tsai B. Penetration of nonenveloped viruses into the cytoplasm. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2007;23:23–43. doi: 10.1146/annurev.cellbio.23.090506.123454. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Mercer J, Schelhaas M, Helenius A. Virus entry by endocytosis. Annu Rev Biochem. 2010;79:803–33. doi: 10.1146/annurev-biochem-060208-104626. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.Crack LR, Jones L, Malavige GN, Patel V, Ogg GS. Human antimicrobial peptides LL-37 and human beta-defensin-2 reduce viral replication in keratinocytes infected with varicella zoster virus. Clinical and experimental dermatology. 2012;37:534–43. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2230.2012.04305.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93.Howell MD, Streib JE, Leung DY. Antiviral activity of human beta-defensin 3 against vaccinia virus. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2007;119:1022–5. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2007.01.044. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94.Gaudreault E, Gosselin J. Leukotriene B4-mediated release of antimicrobial peptides against cytomegalovirus is BLT1 dependent. Viral Immunol. 2007;20:407–20. doi: 10.1089/vim.2006.0099. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95.Widegren H, Andersson M, Borgeat P, Flamand L, Johnston S, Greiff L. LTB4 increases nasal neutrophil activity and conditions neutrophils to exert antiviral effects. Respir Med. 2011;105:997–1006. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2010.12.021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96.Chouinard F, Turcotte C, Guan X, Larose MC, Poirier S, Bouchard L, Provost V, Flamand L, Grandvaux N, Flamand N. 2-Arachidonoyl-glycerol- and arachidonic acid-stimulated neutrophils release antimicrobial effectors against E. coli, S. aureus, HSV-1, and RSV. J Leukoc Biol. 2013;93:267–76. doi: 10.1189/jlb.0412200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97.Hartshorn KL, White MR, Tecle T, Holmskov U, Crouch EC. Innate Defense against Influenza A Virus: Activity of Human Neutrophil Defensins and Interactions of Defensins with Surfactant Protein D. J Immunol. 2006;176:6962–72. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.176.11.6962. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98.Doss M, White MR, Tecle T, Gantz D, Crouch EC, Jung G, Ruchala P, Waring AJ, Lehrer RI, Hartshorn KL. Interactions of alpha-, beta-, and theta-defensins with influenza A virus and surfactant protein D. J Immunol. 2009;182:7878–87. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.0804049. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99.Feng Z, Dubyak GR, Lederman MM, Weinberg A. Cutting edge: human beta defensin 3--a novel antagonist of the HIV-1 coreceptor CXCR4. J Immunol. 2006;177:782–6. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.177.2.782. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100.Lafferty MK, Sun L, DeMasi L, Lu W, Garzino-Demo A. CCR6 ligands inhibit HIV by inducing APOBEC3G. Blood. 2010;115:1564–71. doi: 10.1182/blood-2009-06-226423. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101.Yu G, Shen FS, Sturch S, Aquino A, Glazer RI, Felsted RL. Regulation of HIV-1 gag protein subcellular targeting by protein kinase C. J Biol Chem. 1995;270:4792–6. doi: 10.1074/jbc.270.9.4792. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102.Contreras X, Mzoughi O, Gaston F, Peterlin MB, Bahraoui E. Protein kinase C-delta regulates HIV-1 replication at an early post-entry step in macrophages. Retrovirology. 2012;9:37. doi: 10.1186/1742-4690-9-37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103.Sieczkarski SB, Brown HA, Whittaker GR. Role of protein kinase C betaII in influenza virus entry via late endosomes. J Virol. 2003;77:460–9. doi: 10.1128/JVI.77.1.460-469.2003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104.Root CN, Wills EG, McNair LL, Whittaker GR. Entry of influenza viruses into cells is inhibited by a highly specific protein kinase C inhibitor. J Gen Virol. 2000;81:2697–705. doi: 10.1099/0022-1317-81-11-2697. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105.Constantinescu SN, Cernescu CD, Popescu LM. Effects of protein kinase C inhibitors on viral entry and infectivity. FEBS Lett. 1991;292:31–3. doi: 10.1016/0014-5793(91)80826-o. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106.Leach NR, Roller RJ. Significance of host cell kinases in herpes simplex virus type 1 egress and lamin-associated protein disassembly from the nuclear lamina. Virology. 2010;406:127–37. doi: 10.1016/j.virol.2010.07.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107.Charp PA, Rice WG, Raynor RL, Reimund E, Kinkade JM, Jr, Ganz T, Selsted ME, Lehrer RI, Kuo JF. Inhibition of protein kinase C by defensins, antibiotic peptides from human neutrophils. Biochem Pharmacol. 1988;37:951–6. doi: 10.1016/0006-2952(88)90187-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 108.Amstutz B, Gastaldelli M, Kalin S, Imelli N, Boucke K, Wandeler E, Mercer J, Hemmi S, Greber UF. Subversion of CtBP1-controlled macropinocytosis by human adenovirus serotype 3. EMBO J. 2008;27:956–69. doi: 10.1038/emboj.2008.38. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109.Kalin S, Amstutz B, Gastaldelli M, Wolfrum N, Boucke K, Havenga M, DiGennaro F, Liska N, Hemmi S, Greber UF. Macropinocytotic uptake and infection of human epithelial cells with species B2 adenovirus type 35. J Virol. 2010;84:5336–50. doi: 10.1128/JVI.02494-09. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110.Nakano MY, Boucke K, Suomalainen M, Stidwill RP, Greber UF. The first step of adenovirus type 2 disassembly occurs at the cell surface, independently of endocytosis and escape to the cytosol. J Virol. 2000;74:7085–95. doi: 10.1128/jvi.74.15.7085-7095.2000. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111.Yang D, Chertov O, Bykovskaia SN, Chen Q, Buffo MJ, Shogan J, Anderson M, Schroder JM, Wang JM, Howard OM, Oppenheim JJ. Beta-defensins: linking innate and adaptive immunity through dendritic and T cell CCR6. Science. 1999;286:525–8. doi: 10.1126/science.286.5439.525. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 112.Duits LA, Nibbering PH, van Strijen E, Vos JB, Mannesse-Lazeroms SP, van Sterkenburg MA, Hiemstra PS. Rhinovirus increases human beta-defensin-2 and -3 mRNA expression in cultured bronchial epithelial cells. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol. 2003;38:59–64. doi: 10.1016/S0928-8244(03)00106-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 113.Kato H, Takeuchi O, Mikamo-Satoh E, Hirai R, Kawai T, Matsushita K, Hiiragi A, Dermody TS, Fujita T, Akira S. Length-dependent recognition of double-stranded ribonucleic acids by retinoic acid-inducible gene-I and melanoma differentiation-associated gene 5. J Exp Med. 2008;205:1601–10. doi: 10.1084/jem.20080091. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 114.Wiehler S, Proud D. Interleukin-17A modulates human airway epithelial responses to human rhinovirus infection. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2007;293:L505–15. doi: 10.1152/ajplung.00066.2007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 115.Mallia P, Footitt J, Sotero R, Jepson A, Contoli M, Trujillo-Torralbo MB, Kebadze T, Aniscenko J, Oleszkiewicz G, Gray K, Message SD, Ito K, Barnes PJ, Adcock IM, Papi A, Stanciu LA, Elkin SL, Kon OM, Johnson M, Johnston SL. Rhinovirus infection induces degradation of antimicrobial peptides and secondary bacterial infection in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012;186:1117–24. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201205-0806OC. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 116.Grubor B, Gallup JM, Meyerholz DK, Crouch EC, Evans RB, Brogden KA, Lehmkuhl HD, Ackermann MR. Enhanced surfactant protein and defensin mRNA levels and reduced viral replication during parainfluenza virus type 3 pneumonia in neonatal lambs. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 2004;11:599–607. doi: 10.1128/CDLI.11.3.599-607.2004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 117.Meyerholz DK, Grubor B, Gallup JM, Lehmkuhl HD, Anderson RD, Lazic T, Ackermann MR. Adenovirus-mediated gene therapy enhances parainfluenza virus 3 infection in neonatal lambs. J Clin Microbiol. 2004;42:4780–7. doi: 10.1128/JCM.42.10.4780-4787.2004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118.Kawashima K, Meyerholz DK, Gallup JM, Grubor B, Lazic T, Lehmkuhl HD, Ackermann MR. Differential expression of ovine innate immune genes by preterm and neonatal lung epithelia infected with respiratory syncytial virus. Viral Immunol. 2006;19:316–23. doi: 10.1089/vim.2006.19.316. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 119.Thompson L, Turko I, Murad F. Mass spectrometry-based relative quantification of human neutrophil peptides 1, 2, and 3 from biological samples. Mol Immunol. 2006;43:1485–9. doi: 10.1016/j.molimm.2005.08.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 120.Shao Y, Zhang W, Dong X, Liu W, Zhang C, Zhang J, Zhong Q, Wu Q, Yang H, Chen Y, Wan J, Yu B. Keratinocytes play a role in the immunity to Herpes simplex virus type 2 infection. Acta virologica. 2010;54:261–7. doi: 10.4149/av_2010_04_261. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 121.Ryan LK, Dai J, Yin Z, Megjugorac N, Uhlhorn V, Yim S, Schwartz KD, Abrahams JM, Diamond G, Fitzgerald-Bocarsly P. Modulation of human beta-defensin-1 (hBD-1) in plasmacytoid dendritic cells (PDC), monocytes, and epithelial cells by influenza virus, Herpes simplex virus, and Sendai virus and its possible role in innate immunity. J Leukoc Biol. 2011;90:343–56. doi: 10.1189/jlb.0209079. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 122.Chong KT, Thangavel RR, Tang X. Enhanced expression of murine beta-defensins (MBD-1, -2,- 3, and -4) in upper and lower airway mucosa of influenza virus infected mice. Virology. 2008;380:136–43. doi: 10.1016/j.virol.2008.07.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 123.Jiang Y, Wang Y, Kuang Y, Wang B, Li W, Gong T, Jiang Z, Yang D, Li M. Expression of mouse beta-defensin-3 in MDCK cells and its anti-influenza-virus activity. Arch Virol. 2009;154:639–47. doi: 10.1007/s00705-009-0352-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 124.Gong T, Jiang Y, Wang Y, Yang D, Li W, Zhang Q, Feng W, Wang B, Jiang Z, Li M. Recombinant mouse beta-defensin 2 inhibits infection by influenza A virus by blocking its entry. Arch Virol. 2010;155:491–8. doi: 10.1007/s00705-010-0608-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 125.Wohlford-Lenane CL, Meyerholz DK, Perlman S, Zhou H, Tran D, Selsted ME, McCray PB., Jr Rhesus theta-defensin prevents death in a mouse model of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus pulmonary disease. J Virol. 2009;83:11385–90. doi: 10.1128/JVI.01363-09. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 126.Howell MD. The role of human beta defensins and cathelicidins in atopic dermatitis. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol. 2007;7:413–7. doi: 10.1097/ACI.0b013e3282a64343. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 127.Howell MD, Boguniewicz M, Pastore S, Novak N, Bieber T, Girolomoni G, Leung DY. Mechanism of HBD-3 deficiency in atopic dermatitis. Clin Immunol. 2006;121:332–8. doi: 10.1016/j.clim.2006.08.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 128.Howell MD, Gallo RL, Boguniewicz M, Jones JF, Wong C, Streib JE, Leung DY. Cytokine milieu of atopic dermatitis skin subverts the innate immune response to vaccinia virus. Immunity. 2006;24:341–8. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2006.02.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 129.Howell MD, Jones JF, Kisich KO, Streib JE, Gallo RL, Leung DY. Selective killing of vaccinia virus by LL-37: implications for eczema vaccinatum. J Immunol. 2004;172:1763–7. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.172.3.1763. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 130.Tugizov SM, Herrera R, Veluppillai P, Greenspan D, Soros V, Greene WC, Levy JA, Palefsky JM. HIV is inactivated after transepithelial migration via adult oral epithelial cells but not fetal epithelial cells. Virology. 2011;409:211–22. doi: 10.1016/j.virol.2010.10.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 131.Rodriguez-Garcia M, Climent N, Oliva H, Casanova V, Franco R, Leon A, Gatell JM, Garcia F, Gallart T. Increased alpha-defensins 1–3 production by dendritic cells in HIV-infected individuals is associated with slower disease progression. PLoS One. 2010;5:e9436. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009436. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 132.Kuhn L, Trabattoni D, Kankasa C, Semrau K, Kasonde P, Lissoni F, Sinkala M, Ghosh M, Vwalika C, Aldrovandi GM, Thea DM, Clerici M. Alpha-defensins in the prevention of HIV transmission among breastfed infants. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2005;39:138–42. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 133.Bosire R, John-Stewart GC, Mabuka JM, Wariua G, Gichuhi C, Wamalwa D, Ruzinski J, Goodman R, Lohman B, Mbori-Ngacha DA, Overbaugh J, Farquhar C. Breast milk alpha-defensins are associated with HIV type 1 RNA and CC chemokines in breast milk but not vertical HIV type 1 transmission. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2007;23:198–203. doi: 10.1089/aid.2006.0125. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 134.Cole AM, Cole AL. Antimicrobial polypeptides are key anti-HIV-1 effector molecules of cervicovaginal host defense. Am J Reprod Immunol. 2008;59:27–34. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0897.2007.00561.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 135.Iqbal SM, Kaul R. Mucosal innate immunity as a determinant of HIV susceptibility. Am J Reprod Immunol. 2008;59:44–54. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0897.2007.00563.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 136.Bowdish DM, Davidson DJ, Hancock RE. Immunomodulatory properties of defensins and cathelicidins. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol. 2006;306:27–66. doi: 10.1007/3-540-29916-5_2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 137.Rehaume LM, Hancock RE. Neutrophil-derived defensins as modulators of innate immune function. Crit Rev Immunol. 2008;28:185–200. doi: 10.1615/critrevimmunol.v28.i3.10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 138.Yang D, Biragyn A, Kwak LW, Oppenheim JJ. Mammalian defensins in immunity: more than just microbicidal. Trends Immunol. 2002;23:291–6. doi: 10.1016/s1471-4906(02)02246-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 139.Grigat J, Soruri A, Forssmann U, Riggert J, Zwirner J. Chemoattraction of macrophages, T lymphocytes, and mast cells is evolutionarily conserved within the human alpha-defensin family. Journal of immunology. 2007;179:3958–65. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.179.6.3958. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 140.Ito T, Tanabe H, Ayabe T, Ishikawa C, Inaba Y, Maemoto A, Kono T, Ashida T, Fujiya M, Kohgo Y. Paneth cells regulate both chemotaxis of immature dendritic cells and cytokine production from epithelial cells. The Tohoku journal of experimental medicine. 2012;227:39–48. doi: 10.1620/tjem.227.39. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 141.Yang D, Chen Q, Chertov O, Oppenheim JJ. Human neutrophil defensins selectively chemoattract naive T and immature dendritic cells. J Leukoc Biol. 2000;68:9–14. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 142.Soruri A, Grigat J, Forssmann U, Riggert J, Zwirner J. beta-Defensins chemoattract macrophages and mast cells but not lymphocytes and dendritic cells: CCR6 is not involved. European journal of immunology. 2007;37:2474–86. doi: 10.1002/eji.200737292. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 143.Rohrl J, Yang D, Oppenheim JJ, Hehlgans T. Human beta-defensin 2 and 3 and their mouse orthologs induce chemotaxis through interaction with CCR2. J Immunol. 2010;184:6688–94. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.0903984. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 144.Lillard JW, Jr, Boyaka PN, Chertov O, Oppenheim JJ, McGhee JR. Mechanisms for induction of acquired host immunity by neutrophil peptide defensins. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999;96:651–6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.96.2.651. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 145.Brogden KA, Heidari M, Sacco RE, Palmquist D, Guthmiller JM, Johnson GK, Jia HP, Tack BF, McCray PB. Defensin-induced adaptive immunity in mice and its potential in preventing periodontal disease. Oral microbiology and immunology. 2003;18:95–9. doi: 10.1034/j.1399-302x.2003.00047.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 146.Tani K, Murphy WJ, Chertov O, Salcedo R, Koh CY, Utsunomiya I, Funakoshi S, Asai O, Herrmann SH, Wang JM, Kwak LW, Oppenheim JJ. Defensins act as potent adjuvants that promote cellular and humoral immune responses in mice to a lymphoma idiotype and carrier antigens. Int Immunol. 2000;12:691–700. doi: 10.1093/intimm/12.5.691. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 147.Nagaoka I, Suzuki K, Murakami T, Niyonsaba F, Tamura H, Hirata M. Evaluation of the effect of alpha-defensin human neutrophil peptides on neutrophil apoptosis. International journal of molecular medicine. 2010;26:925–34. doi: 10.3892/ijmm_00000544. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 148.Nagaoka I, Niyonsaba F, Tsutsumi-Ishii Y, Tamura H, Hirata M. Evaluation of the effect of human beta-defensins on neutrophil apoptosis. Int Immunol. 2008;20:543–53. doi: 10.1093/intimm/dxn012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 149.Biragyn A, Ruffini PA, Leifer CA, Klyushnenkova E, Shakhov A, Chertov O, Shirakawa AK, Farber JM, Segal DM, Oppenheim JJ, Kwak LW. Toll-like receptor 4-dependent activation of dendritic cells by beta-defensin 2. Science. 2002;298:1025–9. doi: 10.1126/science.1075565. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 150.Funderburg N, Lederman MM, Feng Z, Drage MG, Jadlowsky J, Harding CV, Weinberg A, Sieg SF. Human -defensin-3 activates professional antigen-presenting cells via Toll-like receptors 1 and 2. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2007;104:18631–5. doi: 10.1073/PNAS.0702130104. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 151.Ferris LK, Mburu YK, Mathers AR, Fluharty ER, Larregina AT, Ferris RL, Falo LD., Jr Human beta-defensin 3 induces maturation of human langerhans cell-like dendritic cells: an antimicrobial peptide that functions as an endogenous adjuvant. J Invest Dermatol. 2013;133:460–8. doi: 10.1038/jid.2012.319. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 152.Presicce P, Giannelli S, Taddeo A, Villa ML, Della Bella S. Human defensins activate monocyte-derived dendritic cells, promote the production of proinflammatory cytokines, and up-regulate the surface expression of CD91. J Leukoc Biol. 2009;86:941–8. doi: 10.1189/jlb.0708412. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 153.Sakamoto N, Mukae H, Fujii T, Ishii H, Yoshioka S, Kakugawa T, Sugiyama K, Mizuta Y, Kadota J, Nakazato M, Kohno S. Differential effects of alpha- and beta-defensin on cytokine production by cultured human bronchial epithelial cells. American journal of physiology. Lung cellular and molecular physiology. 2005;288:L508–13. doi: 10.1152/ajplung.00076.2004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 154.Niyonsaba F, Ushio H, Nagaoka I, Okumura K, Ogawa H. The human beta-defensins (-1, -2, -3, -4) and cathelicidin LL-37 induce IL-18 secretion through p38 and ERK MAPK activation in primary human keratinocytes. J Immunol. 2005;175:1776–84. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.175.3.1776. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 155.Guo CJ, Tan N, Song L, Douglas SD, Ho WZ. Alpha-defensins inhibit HIV infection of macrophages through upregulation of CC-chemokines. AIDS. 2004;18:1217–8. doi: 10.1097/00002030-200405210-00020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 156.O’Neil DA, Porter EM, Elewaut D, Anderson GM, Eckmann L, Ganz T, Kagnoff MF. Expression and regulation of the human beta-defensins hBD-1 and hBD-2 in intestinal epithelium. J Immunol. 1999;163:6718–24. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 157.Semple F, Dorin JR. beta-Defensins: multifunctional modulators of infection, inflammation and more? J Innate Immun. 2012;4:337–48. doi: 10.1159/000336619. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 158.Semple F, Webb S, Li HN, Patel HB, Perretti M, Jackson IJ, Gray M, Davidson DJ, Dorin JR. Human beta-defensin 3 has immunosuppressive activity in vitro and in vivo. Eur J Immunol. 2010;40:1073–8. doi: 10.1002/eji.200940041. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 159.Semple F, MacPherson H, Webb S, Cox SL, Mallin LJ, Tyrrell C, Grimes GR, Semple CA, Nix MA, Millhauser GL, Dorin JR. Human beta-defensin 3 affects the activity of pro-inflammatory pathways associated with MyD88 and TRIF. Eur J Immunol. 2011;41:3291–300. doi: 10.1002/eji.201141648. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 160.Geng LN, Yao Z, Snider L, Fong AP, Cech JN, Young JM, van der Maarel SM, Ruzzo WL, Gentleman RC, Tawil R, Tapscott SJ. DUX4 activates germline genes, retroelements, and immune mediators: implications for facioscapulohumeral dystrophy. Dev Cell. 2012;22:38–51. doi: 10.1016/j.devcel.2011.11.013. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 161.Lande R, Gregorio J, Facchinetti V, Chatterjee B, Wang YH, Homey B, Cao W, Su B, Nestle FO, Zal T, Mellman I, Schroder JM, Liu YJ, Gilliet M. Plasmacytoid dendritic cells sense self-DNA coupled with antimicrobial peptide. Nature. 2007;449:564–9. doi: 10.1038/nature06116. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 162.Tewary P, de la Rosa G, Sharma N, Rodriguez LG, Tarasov SG, Howard OM, Shirota H, Steinhagen F, Klinman DM, Yang D, Oppenheim JJ. beta-Defensin 2 and 3 Promote the Uptake of Self or CpG DNA, Enhance IFN-alpha Production by Human Plasmacytoid Dendritic Cells, and Promote Inflammation. J Immunol. 2013 doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1201648. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 163.Eade CR, Wood MP, Cole AM. Mechanisms and modifications of naturally occurring host defense peptides for anti-HIV microbicide development. Curr HIV Res. 2012;10:61–72. doi: 10.2174/157016212799304580. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 164.Verma C, Seebah S, Low SM, Zhou L, Liu SP, Li J, Beuerman RW. Defensins: antimicrobial peptides for therapeutic development. Biotechnol J. 2007;2:1353–9. doi: 10.1002/biot.200700148. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 165.Hancock RE, Sahl HG. Antimicrobial and host-defense peptides as new anti-infective therapeutic strategies. Nat Biotechnol. 2006;24:1551–7. doi: 10.1038/nbt1267. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES