Antiviral activity of quercetin-3-β-O-D-glucoside against Zika virus infection

  • Gary Wong
  • Shihua He
  • Vinayakumar Siragam
  • Yuhai Bi
  • Majambu Mbikay
  • Michel Chretien
  • Xiangguo Qiu
Letter

Abstract

Q3G is a natural derivative of quercetin and is already widely used in various foods and drinks. Our results clearly demonstrated that Q3G exerts antiviral activity against ZIKV in both tissue culture and knockout mice, and that post-exposure in vivo treatment with Q3G could have a beneficial effect. In the future, Q3G should be tested in human cell lines (such as Huh-7, HeLa, or K048, a fetal brain neural stem cell line) to provide further data supporting its potential efficacy in humans; in addition, live viral loads or viremia should be tested in treated animals to supplement the survival results observed in this study. Although the treatment regimens will need to be further optimized (i.e., dosage, frequency of treatment, and administration routes), our results support the results of Q3G efficacy studies in nonhuman primates against ZIKV infection. Further studies will also be needed to investigate the mechanism of Q3G antiviral action, in order to obtain valuable insights into the design of novel targets for antiviral therapeutics in the future.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

12250_2017_4057_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (294 kb)
Antiviral activity of quercetin-3-β-O-D-glucoside against Zika virus infection

References

  1. Cheng Z, Sun G, Guo W, et al. 2015. Virol Sin, 30: 261–268.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. D’Andrea G.. 2015. Fitoterapia, 106: 256–271.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Govero J, Esakky P, Scheaffer SM, et al. 2016. Nature, 540: 438–442.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Harwood M, Danielewska-Nikiel B, Borzelleca JF, et al.. 2007. Food Chem Toxicol, 45: 2179–2205.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Hollman PC, Katan MB.. 1997. Biomed Pharmacother, 51: 305–310.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Kawiecki AB, Christofferson RC. 2016. J Infect Dis, 214: 1357–1360.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Lanciotti RS, Kosoy OL, Laven JJ, et al. 2008. Emerg Infect Dis, 14: 1232–1239.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Lazear HM, Govero J, Smith AM, et al. 2016. Cell Host Microbe, 19: 720–730.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Ma W, Li S, Ma S, et al. 2016. Cell, 167: 1511–1524.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Qiu X, Kroeker A, He S, et al. 2016. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 60: 5182–5188.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Rastogi M, Sharma N, Singh SK. 2016. Virol J, 13: 131.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Richner JM, Himansu S, Dowd KA, et al. 2017. Cell, 168: 1114–1125.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Uchide N, Toyoda H. 2011. Molecules, 16: 2032–2052.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Wong G, Kobinger GP. 2015. Clin Microbiol Rev, 28: 593–601.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Zanluca C, Melo VC, Mosimann AL, et al. 2015. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz, 110: 569–572.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Wuhan Institute of Virology, CAS and Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Special Pathogens ProgramPublic Health Agency of CanadaWinnipegCanada
  2. 2.Shenzhen Key Laboratory of Pathogen and Immunity, State Key Discipline of Infectious DiseaseShenzhen Third People’s HospitalShenzhenChina
  3. 3.CAS Key Laboratory of Pathogenic Microbiology and Immunology, Institute of MicrobiologyChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina
  4. 4.Department of Medical MicrobiologyUniversity of ManitobaWinnipegCanada
  5. 5.Functional Endoproteolysis LaboratoryClinical Research Institute of MontrealMontrealCanada
  6. 6.Chronic Disease ProgramOttawa Hospital Research InstituteOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations