Post HCV Infection Due to MX Gene Stimulation Produced Post Treatment with Imported and Locally Produced Egyptian Biosimilar IFN

  • Mohamed, Shereen H (National Organization for Research and Control of Biological (NORCB)) ;
  • Mahmoud, Nora F (Faculty of Pharmacy, Suez Canal University) ;
  • Mohamed, Aly F (The Egyptian Company for production of vaccines, Sera and Drugs (Holding Company (Egy-VAC- VACSERA)) ;
  • Kotb, Nahla S (National Organization for Research and Control of Biological (NORCB))
  • Published : 2015.09.02


Background: Cirrhosis is regarded as a possible end stage of many liver diseases, including viral infection. It occurs when healthy liver tissue becomes damaged and is replaced by scar tissue and finally may lead to hepatocellular carcinoma. Interferons (IFNs)are two general categories, type I and II. Type I includes one beta interferon and over 20 different alpha interferons. Alpha interferons are very similar in how they work, interacting with other proteins on cells like receptors. The main objective of this study was to compare Mx gene productivity post different cell line treatment with imported and Egyptian biosimilar locally produced IFNs, as well as the efficacy of those tested IFNs. Also, an assessment was made of sensitivity of different cell lines as alternatives to that recommended for evaluation of antiviral activity. Materials and Methods: Different cell lines (Vero, MDBK and Wish) were employed to evaluate cytotoxicity using the MTT assay. Antiviral activity was evaluated compared with standard IFN against VSV, Indiana strain -156, on tested rh-IFNs (imported; innovated and Egyptian biosimilar locally produced IFNs) in the pre-treated cell lines previously mentioned. The virus was propagated in the Wish cell line as recommended. Finally we estimated up-regulation of the Mx gene as a biomarker. Results: Data recorded revealed that test IFNs were safe in test cell lines. Viability was around 100%. Locally tested interferon did not realize the international potency limits, while the imported one was accepted compared with the standard IFN. These results were the same either using infectivity titer reduction assay or crystal violet staining of residual non- infected cells. Mx protein production was cell type related and confirmed by the detected Mx gene expressed in imported and locally produced IFN pre-treated cell lines. The expression of the gene was arranged in the order of Vero> wish > MDBK for the imported IFN, while for the Egyptian biosimillar locally produced one it was MDBK> Vero> wish. With regard to the antiviral activity there was a significant difference of imported IFN potency compared with the locally produced IFN (P<0.05), the IFN potential (antiviral activity) was not cell line related and showed non-significant difference for each separate product. Conclusions: Vero cells can be used as an alternative cell line for evaluation of IFN potency in case of unavailable USP recommended cell lines. Alternative potency evaluation assay could be used and proved significant difference in IFN potency in case of local and imported agents. Evaluation of antiviral activity could be used in parallel to viral infectivity reduction assay for better accuracy. Mx gene can be used as a marker for IFN potential.


  1. Abel K, Algeria-Hartman MJ, Rothaeusler K, Marthas M, Miller CJ (2002). The relationship between Simian Immunodeficiency virus RNA levels and the mRNA levels of Alpha/Beta Interferon (IFN ${\alpha}/{\beta}$) and IFN ${\alpha}/{\beta}$-inducible MX in Lymphoid tissue of Rhesus Macaques during Acute and Chronic infection. J Virol, 76, 8433-45.
  2. Aline Gonzalez Vigani, Eduardo Sellan Goncales, Maria Helena Postal Pavan, et al (2012). Therapeutic effectiveness of biosimilar standard interferon versus pegylated interferon for chronic hepatitis C genotypes 2 or 3. Braz J Infect Dis, 16, 232-6.
  3. AASLD (American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases). Recommendations for testing, managing and treating hepatitis C. Monitoring patients who are starting hepatitis C treatment, are on treatment, or have completed therapy
  4. Baglioni C, Nilsen TW (1984). in Gresser 1 (ed) Interferon. Vol.5. Academic Press. New York p23; 1984.
  5. Blanchard A, Helene D'Iorio and Robert Ford (2010). What you need to know to succeed: Key trends in Canada's biotech industry. Insights, spring.
  6. Doris Muller-Doblies, Mathias Ackermann and Alfred Metzler (2002). In vitro and in vivo detection of mx gene products in bovine cells following stimulation with alpha/beta interferon and viruses. Clinical Vaccine Immunol, 9, 1192-9.
  7. de Weerd NA, Samarajiwa SA and Hertzog PJ (2007). Type I interferon receptors: biochemistry and biological functions. J Biol Chem, 282, 20053-7.
  8. EMEA (2006). Guideline on similar biological medicinal products containing biotecnology-derived proteins as active substance: QUALITY ISSUES.
  9. EMEA (2008). D.R.E.R., Questions and answers on biosimilar medicines (similar biological medicinal products). London.
  10. Entrez Gene (2013). MX1 myxovirus (influenza virus) resistance 1, interferon-inducible protein p78 (mouse).
  11. EASL (European Association for the Study of the Liver) (2014). Clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatitis C virus infection. J Hepatol, 60, 392-420.
  12. Ge D, Fellay J, Thompson AJ, et al (2009). Genetic variation in IL28B predicts hepatitis C treatment-induced viral clearance. Nature, 461, 399-401.
  13. Gao J, Xie L, Yang WS, et al (2012). Risk factors of hepatocellular carcinoma--current status and perspectives. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 13, 743-52.
  14. Horisberger MA (1992). Interferon-induced human protein MxA is a GTPase which binds transiently to cellular proteins. J Virol, 66, 4705-9.
  15. Haller O, Staeheli P, Kochs G (2007). Interferon-induced Mx proteins in antiviral host defense. Biochimie, 89, 812-8.
  16. Hideaki Tsukuma, Hideo Tanaka, Wakiko Ajiki, Akira Oshima (2005). Liver cancer and its prevention. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 6, 244-50.
  17. James G. Files, Julia L. Gray, Linh T. Do, et al (1998). A novel sensitive and selective bioassay for human type i interferons. J Interferon Cytokine Res, 18, 1019-24.
  18. Lund JM1, Alexopoulou L, Sato A, et al (2004). Recognition of single-stranded RNA viruses by Toll-like receptor 7. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 101, 5598-603.
  19. KD Croen (1993). Evidence for antiviral effect of nitric oxide. Inhibition of herpes simplex virus type 1 replication. J Clin Invest, 91, 2446-52.
  20. Korth M.J, Taylor M.D, Katze M.G (1998). Interferon inhibits the replication of HIV-1, SIV and SHIV chimeric viruses by distinct mechanisms. Virology, 247, 265-73.
  21. Kenneth C.M, Worthen S (2003). Lipopolysaccharide stimulates p38-dependent induction of antiviral genes in neutrophils independently of paracrine factors. J Biol Chem, 278, 15693-701.
  22. Manns MP, McHutchison JG, Gordon SC, et al (2001). Peginterferon alfa-2b plus ribavirin compared with interferon alfa-2b plus ribavirin for initial treatment of chronic hepatitis C. Randomised trial. Lancet, 358, 958-65.
  23. Mohamed A.F, Shoman S.A (2006). Antiviral activity of recombinant human interferon-α to rift valley fever virus and related Mx-protein potential as a biomarker. Egy J Biotechnol, 21, 203-6.
  24. Mehta DR, Ashkar AA, Mossman KL (2012). The nitric oxide pathway provides innate antiviral protection in conjunction with the type i interferon pathway in fibroblasts. PLoS ONE, 7, 31688.
  25. Nick C (2012). The US biosimilars act: challenges facing regulatory approval. Pharm Med, 26, 2145-52.
  26. Pavlovic J, Haller O, Staeheli P (1992). Human and mouse Mx proteins inhibit different steps of the influenza virus multiplication cycle. J Virol, 66, 2564-9.
  27. Ponten A, Sick C, Weeber M, Haller O, Kochs G (1997). Dominant-negative mutants of human MXA protein: domains in the carboxy-terminal moiety are important for oligomerization and antiviral activity. J Virol, 71, 2591- 9.
  28. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P (2001). Estimating the world cancer burden: Globocan 2000. Int J Cancer, 94, 153-6.
  29. Reed LJ, Muench H (1938). A simple method of estimating fifty percent end-points. Am J Hygiene, 27, 493-7.
  30. Sambrook J, Fritch E.F, Maniatis T (1989). Molecular cloning: A Laboratory Manual Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY.
  31. Shinji H (2005). The broad anti-viral agent glycyrrhizin directly modulates the fluidity of plasma membrane and HIV-1 envelope. Biochem J antiviral, 392, 191-9.
  32. Steven S, Richard LH, Stephen AY, Weidbrauk DL (2009). Clinical virology manual, 4th ed, ASM press, pp 1-692.
  33. Sahapat Barusrux, Chatchawan Sengthong, Yupa Urwijitaroon (2014). Epidemiology of hepatitis C virus genotypes in northeastern Thai blood samples. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 8837-42
  34. Samir Y Abbas, Awatef A Farag, Yousry A, Ammar, et al (2013). Synthesis, characterization, and antiviral activity of novel fluorinated isatin derivatives. Monatsh Chem, 144, 1725-33.
  35. World Health Organization (2009). Expert committee on biological standardization: guidelines on evaluation of similar biotherapeutic products (SBPs). World Health Organization.
  36. Xiao-Chun Ni, Yong Yi, Yi-Peng Fu, et al (2014). Serum Amyloid A is a Novel Prognostic Biomarker in Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 10713-8.