Advertisement

Suppression of Virus Reproduction by Hydrophobized Antibodies Against Viral Proteins

  • N. S. Melik-Nubarov
  • A. V. Ovcharenko
  • P. G. Sveshnikov
  • A. V. Kabanov
Conference paper

Abstract

Antibodies against viral proteins are widely used in many fields of diagnostics of viral diseases (McCullough 1986, Carter and Meulen 1984). Nevertheless antiviral antibodies are not used practically (Carter and Muelen 1984) for the therapy of such diseases and, particularly, for the suppression of virus reproduction. It is known that antibodies against virus can prevent the infection of cells by this virus (Mandel 1979). However, the same antibodies do not affect the development of infection in already infected cells, since they cannot penetrate into them and block intracellular reproduction of the virus (De Barsy and Van Hoof 1980). An effective method for imparting transmembrane properties to water-soluble proteins has been developed recently (Kabanov et at 1985, Levashov et at 1985, Kabanov 1989). For this purpose, a lipid “anchor” (fatty acid residue) is covalently attached to the protein molecule. As a result, hydrophobized proteins retain their functional activity and acquire an ability to incorporate into the lipid membrane or, maybe penetrate through it and suppress the intracellular stages of the virus reproduction.

Keywords

Influenza Virus Virus Reproduction Viral Protein Reversed Micelle MDCK Cell 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Carter M, Muelen V (1984) Adv Virus res 29: 95–130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cretescul L, Beare AS, Schild GC (1978) Infect Immun 22:322–328Google Scholar
  3. De Barsy T, Van Hoof F (1980) Liposomes in biological systems (Gregorian G and Alison AC ems.) John Wiley and Sons,Chichester, p. 211–216Google Scholar
  4. Kabanov AV, Kabanov AC, Torchilin VP, Martinek K, Levashov AV (1987) Bioorg Khim(Ross.) 13:1321–1324Google Scholar
  5. Kabanov AV, Levashov AV, Alakhov VYu, Kravtzova TN, Martinek K, (1989) Coll Czech Them Common 54: 835–837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kabanov AV, Nametkin AN, Levashov AV, Martinek K (1985) Biol Membrany (Ross.) 2: 985–995Google Scholar
  7. Levashov AV, Kabanov AV, Nametkin AN, Martinek K, Berezin IV (1985) Doklady Academii Nauk SSSR (Ross.) 2 84:755–758; DAN (Engl. en) (1985) 248: 306–309Google Scholar
  8. Mandel B (1979) Comprehensive Virology vol.15 (Frankel-Conrat H and Wagner RR eds.) p 37–121, Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. McCullough K.G. (1986) Arch Virol 87:1–36PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Wrigley NO (1979) Br Med Bull 35: 35–38PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Zhirnov OP, Ovcharenko AV, Bukrinskaya AO (1982) Arch Virol 71:177–183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. S. Melik-Nubarov
    • 1
  • A. V. Ovcharenko
    • 1
  • P. G. Sveshnikov
    • 1
  • A. V. Kabanov
    • 1
  1. 1.Ministry of HealthResearch Center of Molecular DiagnosticsMoscowUSSR

Personalised recommendations