The epithelium is a highly organized type of animal tissue. Except for blood and lymph vessels, epithelial cells cover the body, line its cavities in single or stratified layers and support exchange between compartments. In addition, epithelia offer to the body a barrier to pathogen invasion. To transit through or to replicate in epithelia, viruses have to face several obstacles, starting from cilia and glycocalyx where they can be neutralized by secreted immunoglobulins. Tight junctions and adherens junctions also prevent viruses to cross the epithelial barrier. However, viruses have developed multiple strategies to blaze their path through the epithelium by utilizing components of cell–cell adhesion structures as receptors. In this Commentary, we discuss how viruses take advantage of the apical junction complex to spread. Whereas some viruses quickly disrupt epithelium integrity, others carefully preserve it and use cell adhesion proteins and their cytoskeletal connections to rapidly spread laterally. This is exemplified by the hidden transmission of enveloped viruses that use nectins as receptors. Finally, several viruses that replicate preferentially in cancer cells are currently used as experimental cancer therapeutics. Remarkably, these viruses use cell adhesion molecules as receptors, probably because – to reach tumors and metastases – oncolytic viruses must efficiently traverse or break epithelia.

Research in the last decade has uncovered many new paramyxoviruses, airborne agents that cause epidemic diseases in animals including humans. Most paramyxoviruses enter epithelial cells of the airway using sialic acid as a receptor and cause only mild disease. However, others cross the epithelial barrier and cause more severe disease. For some of these viruses, the host receptors have been identified, and the mechanisms of cell entry have been elucidated. The tetrameric attachment proteins of paramyxoviruses have vastly different binding affinities for their cognate receptors, which they contact through different binding surfaces. Nevertheless, all input signals are converted to the same output: conformational changes that trigger refolding of trimeric fusion proteins and membrane fusion. Experiments with selectively receptor-blinded viruses inoculated into their natural hosts have provided insights into tropism, identifying the cells and tissues that support growth and revealing the mechanisms of pathogenesis. These analyses also shed light on diabolically elegant mechanisms used by morbilliviruses, including the measles virus, to promote massive amplification within the host, followed by efficient aerosolization and rapid spread through host populations. In another paradigm of receptor-facilitated severe disease, henipaviruses, including Nipah and Hendra viruses, use different members of one protein family to cause zoonoses. Specific properties of different paramyxoviruses, like neurotoxicity and immunosuppression, are now understood in the light of receptor specificity. We propose that research on the specific receptors for several newly identified members of the Paramyxoviridae family that may not bind sialic acid is needed to anticipate their zoonotic potential and to generate effective vaccines and antiviral compounds.

The measles virus (MeV) membrane fusion apparatus consists of a fusion protein trimer and an attachment protein tetramer. To trigger membrane fusion, the heads of the MeV attachment protein, hemagglutinin (H), bind cellular receptors while the 96-residue-long H stalk transmits the triggering signal. Structural and functional studies of the triggering mechanism of other paramyxoviruses suggest that receptor binding to their hemagglutinin-neuraminidase (HN) results in signal transmission through the central segments of their stalks. To gain insight into H-stalk structure and function, we individually replaced its residues with cysteine. We then assessed how stable the mutant proteins are, how efficiently they can be cross-linked by disulfide bonds, whether cross-linking results in loss of function, and, in this case, whether disulfide bond reduction restores function. While many residues in the central segment of the stalk and in the spacer segment above it can be efficiently cross-linked by engineered disulfide bonds, we report here that residues 59 to 79 cannot, suggesting that the 20 membrane-proximal residues are not engaged in a tetrameric structure. Rescue-of-function studies by disulfide bond reduction resulted in the redefinition and extension of the central fusion-activation segment as covering residues 84 to 117. In particular, we identified four residues located between positions 92 and 99, the function of which cannot be restored by disulfide bond reduction after cysteine mutagenesis. These mutant H proteins reached the cell surface as complex oligomers but could not trigger membrane fusion. We discuss these observations in the context of the stalk exposure model of membrane fusion triggering by paramyxoviruses. IMPORTANCEMeasles virus, while being targeted for eradication, still causes significant morbidity and mortality. Here, we seek to understand how it enters cells by membrane fusion. Two viral integral membrane glycoproteins (hemagglutinin tetramers and fusion protein trimers) mediate the concerted receptor recognition and membrane fusion processes. Since previous studies have suggested that the hemagglutinin stalk transmits the triggering signal to the fusion protein trimer, we completed an analysis of its structure and function by systematic Cys mutagenesis. We report that while certain residues of the central stalk segment confer specificity to the interaction with the fusion protein trimer, others are necessary to allow folding of the H-oligomer in a standard conformation conducive to fusion triggering, and still other residues sustain the conformational change that transmits the fusiontriggering signal.

Here, we show that cells expressing the adherens junction protein nectin-1 capture nectin-4-containing membranes from the surface of adjacent cells in a trans-endocytosis process. We find that internalized nectin-1-nectin-4 complexes follow the endocytic pathway. The nectin-1 cytoplasmic tail controls transfer: its deletion prevents trans-endocytosis, while its exchange with the nectin-4 tail reverses transfer direction. Nectin-1-expressing cells acquire dyelabeled cytoplasmic proteins synchronously with nectin-4, a process most active during cell adhesion. Some cytoplasmic cargo remains functional after transfer, as demonstrated with encapsidated genomes of measles virus (MeV). This virus uses nectin-4, but not nectin-1, as a receptor. Epithelial cells expressing nectin-4, but not those expressing another MeV receptor in its place, can transfer infection to nectin-1expressing primary neurons. Thus, this newly discovered process can move cytoplasmic cargo, including infectious material, from epithelial cells to neurons. We name the process nectin-elicited cytoplasm transfer (NECT). NECT-related trans-endocytosis processes may be exploited by pathogens to extend tropism. This article has an associated First Person interview with the first author of the paper.