Previous Article | Next Article 
Journal of Virology, September 2004, p. 9820-9827, Vol. 78, No. 18
0022-538X/04/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JVI.78.18.9820-9827.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Tagging Retrovirus Vectors with a Metal Binding Peptide and One-Step Purification by Immobilized Metal Affinity Chromatography
Kaiming Ye,1* Sha Jin,2 Mohammad M. Ataai,3 Jerome S. Schultz,1,
and Jeanette Ibeh3
Center for Biotechnology and Bioengineering, Department of Bioengineering,1
Department of Molecular Genetics and Biochemistry, School of Medicine,2
Chemical Engineering Department, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania3
Received 2 November 2003/
Accepted 28 April 2004

ABSTRACT
Retroviral vectors produced from packaging cells are invariably
contaminated by protein, nucleic acid, and other substances
introduced in the manufacturing process. Elimination of these
contaminants from retroviral vector preparations is helpful
to reduce unwanted side effects, and purified vector preparations
are desirable to improve reproducibility of therapeutic effect.
Here we report a novel approach to engineer a metal binding
peptide (MBP)-tagged murine leukemia virus (MuLV), allowing
for one-step purification of retroviral vectors by immobilized
metal affinity chromatography (IMAC). We inserted a His
6 peptide
into an ecotropic envelope protein (Env) by replacing part of
its hypervariable region sequence with a sequence encoding the
His
6 peptide. Display of the His
6 tag on the surface of Env
endowed the vectors with a high affinity for immobilized metal
ions, such as nickel. We demonstrated that the His
6-tagged MuLV
could be produced to high titers and could be highly purified
by one-step IMAC. The protein and DNA contaminants in the purified
vector supernatants were below 7 µg/ml and 25 pg/ml, respectively,
indicating a 1,229-fold reduction in protein contaminant level
and a 6,800-fold reduction in DNA contaminant level. About 56%
of the viral vectors were recovered in the IMAC purification.
The purified vectors retained their functionality and infectivity.
These results establish that an MBP can be functionally displayed
on the surface of ecotropic retroviruses without interfering
with their integrity, and MBP-tagged retroviral vectors can
be highly purified by one-step IMAC.

INTRODUCTION
Recombinant retroviral vectors are used in the majority of gene
therapy trials to accomplish life-long cures of inherited diseases.
Retroviral vectors produced from packaging cell lines are invariably
contaminated by proteins and nucleic acids, as well as other
substances introduced in the manufacturing process (
7,
22).
Elimination of these contaminants from retroviral vector preparations
is helpful to reduce unwanted side effects, and purified vector
preparations are desirable to improve reproducibility of therapeutic
effect.
At the laboratory scale, the processing of retroviral vectors is relatively straightforward. The viral vector supernatants are usually prepared by separation of viral particles from particulates and cell debris by filtration through 0.45-µm-pore-size membranes. Nevertheless, the manufacture of retroviral vectors for use in human gene therapy is quite complicated. It requires not only large volumes but also high purity of the viral supernatants (2). Although large-scale production of retroviral vectors can be readily achieved with existing technologies, purification of the retroviral vectors remains a difficult technical challenge. Considerable efforts have been made to develop a variety of processes for purification of retroviral vectors. Both ultracentrifugation and low-speed centrifugation have been employed to prepare highly concentrated retroviral vectors (3, 8, 10, 36). Cosedimentation of small cell-derived vesicles, as well as serum proteins, with the viral particles led to even more serious contamination in those concentrated retroviral vectors (4, 19). The retroviral vectors are 80 to 100 nm in diameter (6) and have a density of 1.16 to 1.18 g/ml, which is similar to the density of cell culture medium (21). Consequently, it is impossible to remove all of the contaminants from viral supernatants by centrifugation. The removal of serum protein contaminants may be achieved by a size-exclusion membrane filtration using a 100-kDa molecular mass cutoff membrane (5, 18, 29, 34). Large-molecule contaminants (i.e., mass of >100 kDa), such as bovine immunoglobulins and proteoglycans, however, cannot be eliminated from the vector supernatants with this method (2, 18, 20). Other methods, including polyethylene glycerol precipitation (1), calcium phosphate precipitation (26), and two-phase extraction (13, 14), have also been examined for purification of retroviral vectors. Cosedimentation of impurities along with retroviral particles limits the use of any of these methods. Nevertheless, all of these methods are time- and cost-consuming, difficult to scale up and, most importantly, they can significantly reduce the transduction ability of retroviral vectors (2, 34).
More recently, several groups have developed a number of rapid purification techniques with affinity chromatography by utilizing some specific ligands on a virus surface. A good example is the alphaherpesvirus, which attaches to cells by binding to the negatively charged sulfate groups of the cell surface heparin sulfate. Since sulfonic acid contains an SO3H group which is chemically similar to the heparin sulfate, a sulfonic acid-modified cation membrane has been tested to purify the virus by chromatography (16). However, this methodology requires a specific glycoprotein called gC for the virus' binding to the cation exchange membrane. Size-exclusion chromatography has also been explored for virus purification (24). As with the size-exclusion membrane filtration, the removal of high-molecular-weight contaminants is difficult to achieve (2). While chemically stable and inexpensive ligands with a relatively high specificity for the viruses are attractive for large-scale purification of viral vectors, the requirement of specific acceptors on the viral surface to mediate their binding to the ligands used in the chromatography has hindered the use of this technology for retroviral vector preparation (27).
Immobilized metal affinity chromatography (IMAC) has the potential to become a new methodology for preparation of highly purified retroviral vectors. In IMAC, the composition and conformation of a protein dictate the binding affinity of the protein for immobilized metal ions (32). The difference in binding affinities of proteins for immobilized metal ions is the basis for protein fractionation in IMAC (9). Typically, nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA) or iminodiacetic acid is linked to an agarose or silica gel support to provide chelation sites for a metal ion (Zn2+, Cu2+, or Ni2+) via the NTA or iminodiacetic acid functional groups. Factors such as the accessibility, microenvironment of the binding residue (i.e., histidine, cysteine, and tryptophan), cooperation between neighboring amino acid side groups, and local conformations play important roles in the strength of binding and, thus, protein retention and specificity. Subsequent destruction of the bond by lowering the pH or addition of a competing ligand such as imidazole in the mobile phase displaces the bound protein and results in the elution of the metal binding protein. Because the binding of the protein to the immobilized metal ions is specific, impurities which do not possess the metal binding site will not bind and can be purified away from the bound material. When the prerequisites for retention on IMAC resin are absent, genetic modifications may endow a protein with increased metal binding affinity by insertion of the binding moiety into its amino acid sequence. The amino acid sequences of the metal affinity tags are selected based on either (i) a previously noticed capacity of a given peptide sequence to interact with metal ions, or (ii) the premise that multiplicity of histidine residues will increase metal binding. To adopt IMAC for the purification of retroviral vector supernatants, we proposed to display a metal binding peptide (MBP) on the surface of a retrovirus by inserting an MBP into the surface unit protein (SU) of the retrovirus, thereby endowing the retrovirus with a high affinity for immobilized metal ions. The MBP-tagged viral vectors can then be highly purified by IMAC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Cell lines.
293T cells and the packaging cell line GP293 (BD Clontech, Palo
Alto, Calif.) were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium
(DMEM) with 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (FBS; American
Type Culture Collection, Manassas, Va.). The retrovirus producer
cell line RVPC-1 was grown in DMEM with 10% non-heat-inactivated
FBS (
40).
Mutagenesis.
E/A-PRR was kindly provided by Paula M. Cannon (39). This plasmid encodes an ecotropic Env protein with the PRR region replaced by that of an amphotropic virus. pRVHis_e encodes a His6-tagged ecotropic Env, which was constructed by inserting the His6 peptide sequence into the PRR region encoded in E/A-PRR. The oligonucleotides used for His6 peptide insertion were His-1 (5'-ACAATCCTGCAGCATCACCATCACCATCACTCAACCTCCCCTACAAGTCCAAGTGTCC-3') and His-1R (5'-AGGGAACAAAAGCTGGAGCT-3'). The PstI site is underlined, and the His6 peptide sequence is italicized. The PCR products amplified from E/A-PRR using His-1 and His-1R were digested with restriction enzymes and ligated into E/A-PRR through the restriction enzyme sites, PstI and NotI, resulting in pRVHis_e. As a result, the sequence between PstI and StuI in the PRR region was replaced by the His6 peptide sequence.
Western blotting.
In order to analyze the form of the His6-tagged Env present in cell lysates, 293T cells were transfected with envelope protein expression plasmids alone (8 µg of DNA per 100-mm plate). Cell lysates were prepared by incubating the cells in 500 µl of M-PER lysis buffer (Pierce, Rockford, Ill.) for 10 min at room temperature, followed by centrifugation at 10,000 x g for 10 min at 4°C to pellet nuclei. Envelope proteins were denatured by treating the lysates with 0.5% sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and 1% ß-mercaptoethanol for 5 min at 100°C and then deglycosylated in a deglycosylation buffer (New England BioLabs, Beverly, Mass.) for 1 h at 37°C. Proteins were separated on a 4-to-20% gradient polyacrylamide gel and transferred onto a nitrocellulose membrane (0.4 µm) by using a semidry electroblotter (Fisher Scientifics, Pittsburgh, Pa.). The blot was blocked overnight at 4°C in 5% nonfat milk in Tris-buffered saline (TBS)-Tween buffer (10 mM Tris-HCl [pH 7.5], 150 mM NaCl, and 0.1% Tween 20), followed by incubation with primary antibodies, goat anti-Rauscher murine leukemia virus (MuLV) gp69/71 in a 1:1,000 dilution ratio (American Type Culture Collection). After washing with TBS-Tween buffer three times each for 10 min, the blot was incubated with the secondary antibodies, rabbit anti-goat immunoglobulin G (IgG) horseradish peroxidase (HRP) conjugates (Sigma, St. Louis, Mo.), in a 1:10,000 dilution ratio for 1 h at room temperature and thereafter given a further wash three times, each for 10 min in TBS-Tween buffer. Proteins were visualized with the super-chemiluminescence reagent (Pierce).
Immunolocalization of the His6-tagged Env.
293T cells were transiently transfected with an envelope protein expression plasmid alone (8 µg of DNA per 100-mm plate) and harvested 48 h posttransfection. After washing once with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) buffer, 106 cells were transferred into 50 µl of ice-cold PBS-5% bovine serum albumin (BSA) buffer and incubated for 10 min at 4°C, followed by washing twice with ice-cold PBS buffer. The cells were thereafter incubated with mouse anti-Penta-His antibodies at a 1:50 dilution ratio in the PBS-1% BSA buffer for 1 h at 4°C. After washing three times each with 200 µl of ice-cold PBS buffer, the cells were incubated with anti-mouse IgG fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) conjugate (Sigma), with a 1:100 dilution ratio in the PBS-1% BSA buffer for 1 h at 4°C, followed by washing four times each with 200 µl of ice-cold PBS buffer. The expression of the His6-tagged Env was detected by FACScan (Becton Dickinson, San Diego, Calif.). Fluorescence microscopy was also performed to image the His6-tagged Env on the cell surface. The cells were incubated with mouse anti-Penta-His antibodies against the His6 tag. Rabbit anti-mouse IgG FITC conjugate (Sigma) was used as secondary antibody. After staining, the cells were examined under an inverted fluorescence microscope (IX 70; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan).
Viral vector production.
Retroviral vectors were produced by cotransfection of a viral vector, pCMVEGFP_neo (40), into GP293 cells with an Env expression plasmid by using the PolyFect transfection reagent (QIAGEN, Valencia, Calif.) as described elsewhere (41). The viral supernatants were collected 48 h posttransfection, filtered through a 0.45-µm membrane filter, and stored at 70°C until use. The viral titer was determined with NIH 3T3 cells. In brief, the cells were plated in six-well plates at a density of 105 cells per well 1 day prior to infection. One milliliter of 10-fold-serially diluted virus supernatants was used to infect the cells in each well in the presence of 8 µg of Polybrene/ml. The medium was exchanged with fresh medium 24 h postinfection, and 1.2 mg of G418/ml was added to the medium 48 h postinfection. The medium was then exchanged every 4 days until 12 days. The resistant colonies were scored by methylene blue staining. Ecotropic MuLV vectors, which served as a control for the experiments described below, were produced from RVPC-1 cells (40).
IMAC purification of the His6-tagged retroviral vectors.
A column filled with 1 ml of Ni-NTA agarose (QIAGEN) was used to purify the His6-tagged retroviral vectors. The column was preequilibrated with a five-bed volume of PBS buffer (pH 7.5). The vector supernatants were buffered to pH 7.5 with 10x PBS buffer. A 3-ml aliquot of the viral supernatants was gravity fed into the column at a rate of 0.6 ml/min, followed by washing with 10 ml of PBS buffer containing 10 mM imidazole (pH 7.5). The retroviral vectors were eluted with PBS buffers containing high concentrations of imidazole ranging from 40 to 250 mM at a rate of 0.6 to 0.7 ml/min.
SDS-PAGE.
SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) was performed to determine the removal of protein contaminants from the vector supernatants by IMAC. The proteins were resolved onto a 4-to-20% gradient precast gel (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, Calif.), visualized with CBB-R250 dye, and detected with a Kodak 1-D gel analysis system (Kodak, Tokyo, Japan).
Protein and DNA assays.
Protein contaminants in the vector supernatant, flowthrough, washing, and elution fractions were determined by protein microassay using the reagents from Bio-Rad Laboratories. The lowest protein concentration that can be detected in the microassay is 1 µg/ml. DNA contaminants in the vector supernatant were measured with PicoGreen dye (Molecular Probes) according to the manufacturer's instructions. A standard curve was prepared using
DNA concentrations between 25 pg/ml and 50 ng/ml.

RESULTS
Construction of the His6-tagged Env.
The retention of ecotropic MuLV vectors on the Ni-NTA chromatography
column was first examined. As presented in Table
1, almost 100%
of the MuLV vectors passed through the column without binding.
It was postulated that fusion of a short MBP to a retroviral
surface protein might endow the retrovirus with sufficient affinity
for immobilized metal ions, e.g., Ni
2+. An important question
was whether an insertion site could be identified such that
the MBP would be surface exposed and accessible for binding
to the immobilized nickel. Another issue of concern was the
infectivity of the engineered vectors. To be effective as an
affinity peptide for retroviral vector purification, the peptide
should not lead to any significant decrease in viral titer.
MuLV encodes an Env precursor, Pr85, that is initially glycosylated
in the endoplasmic reticulum, further processed in the Golgi
apparatus, and proteolytically cleaved to generate two subunits,
the surface protein unit (SU), gp70, and the transmembrane protein
(TM), p15E (
25,
30,
38). The signal sequence directs Env to
enter a secretory pathway and reach the cell surface, where
they are incorporated into budding virions (
15) and form the
surface proteins. The N-terminal portion of SU is responsible
for receptor recognition, which determines virus host range
(
23,
25), whereas the C-terminal portion of SU is more conserved
and is believed to be associated with TM (
31,
35). A hypervariable
PRR links the N and C termini of SU (
37). The N terminus of
PRR is conserved among five subtypes of MuLVs with a consensus
sequence of GPR(I/V)PIGPNP (
12) and is essential for viral infection
(
33,
37), whereas the C terminus of PRR is variable in length
and in sequence among different viruses (
17,
28,
39). X-ray
structural analyses of feline leukemia virus revealed that PRR
forms an exposed loop between the N- and C-terminal domains
of SU (
11). Accordingly, the insertion of a small peptide in
the hypervariable region of PRR would most likely lead to surface
exposure of the peptide. Mutagenesis studies demonstrated that
truncation of up to 29 amino acids in the hypervariable region
of PRR had very little effect on the viral titer (
37). Taken
together, we decided to insert a His
6 peptide in the hypervariable
region of PRR. The His
6 peptide was selected because of its
ability to interact strongly with immobilized nickel and other
divalent metal ions, such as copper and zinc. The choice of
the His
6 peptide, therefore, enabled us to test the availability
of the peptide for binding to the immobilized nickel and the
peptide's effect on virus infectivity. The His
6-tagged Env was
engineered by inserting a His
6 peptide sequence into the hypervariable
region of PRR by using site-directed mutagenesis (Fig.
1). The
sequence between PstI and StuI in the amphotropic PRR encoded
by E/A-PRR was deleted and replaced by a sequence (CATCACCATCACCATCAC)
encoding the His
6 peptide (HHHHHH). To facilitate screening
for positive mutants in the site-directed mutagenesis, we replaced
the StuI site with a sequence that was originally used in the
amphotropic PRR. As a result, the chimeric PRR consisted of
55 amino acid residues, including 15 highly conserved amino
acid residues at the N terminus of PRR. The viruses bearing
the chimeric PRR on their surface were produced and titers were
determined for examining the effect of the His
6 peptide insertion
on the viral integrity. We found no significant reduction in
viral titer for the His
6-tagged viruses. As shown in Table
1,
the titer of the His
6-tagged RVHis_e vectors was about (3.5
± 0.5)
x10
5 CFU/ml (mean ± standard error), whereas
the titer of the ecotropic MuLV vectors was (4.5 ± 0.3)
x10
5 CFU/ml. Accordingly, we concluded that the insertion of
the His
6 peptide in PRR did not interfere with the viral integrity.
Immunolocalization of His6-tagged Env.
To determine the accessibility of the His
6 site, we detected
His
6-tagged Env by immunolocalization assay. The chimeric Env
proteins were expressed in 293T cells, and the cell surface-localized
Env was examined by flow cytometry with an anti-Penta-His antibody.
Anti-Penta-His antibody specifically recognizes the 5-adjacent
histidine peptide (xHHHHHx; x signifies any amino acid other
than histidine). The nontransfected 293T cells served as a negative
control (Fig.
2a), and E/A-PRR-transfected 293T cells were used
as a mock for the assays. Compared to the mock and control,
the indirect immunostaining of pRVHis_e-transfected cells gave
rise to a shift of the mean fluorescence peak to 8 arbitrary
units (relative fluorescence), resulting in a 25.96-fold enhanced
signal (Fig.
2d). About 66.3% of pRVHis_e-transfected 293T cells
were labeled by anti-Penta-His antibody (Fig.
2c), indicating
a good accessibility of the peptide ligands. The other 33.5%
of cells did not show fluorescence, partly due to low transfection
efficiency. Indeed, the transfection efficiency that we tested
(using enhanced green fluorescent protein as a reporter) was
around 70%. Besides, a histogram of the antibody-labeled cells
showed a wide spread of fluorescence intensity. This may be
attributable to a variable expression level of Env proteins
on the cell surface. Fluorescence microscopy confirmed the display
of the His
6-tagged Env on the surface of pRVHis_e-transfected
293T cells. To detect the display of the His
6-tagged Env on
the cell surface of pRVHis_e-transfected 293T cells, the cells
were stained with anti-Penta-His antibody as primary antibody
and anti-mouse IgG FITC conjugate as secondary antibody. We
observed a green fluorescence ring around the pRVHis_e-transfected
cells under a fluorescence microscope, indicating the surface
exposure of the His
6-tagged Env to the antibodies (Fig.
3d).
To examine the effect of the His
6 peptide on the processing
of Pr85 to SU and TM subunits, we analyzed the form of Env proteins
present in the lysates of 293T cells. We employed
N-glycosidase
to treat the lysates in order to clearly discriminate Pr85,
as well as SU, from various processing intermediates of Pr85.
Probing a Western blot of Pr85 and SU with an anti-SU antibody
revealed approximately equal amounts of Pr85 and SU in the E/A-PRR-
and pRVHis_e-transfected 293T cell lysates, indicating a similar
level of Pr85 processing of SU for both constructs (Fig.
4).
One-step purification of the His6-tagged retroviral vectors using one-step IMAC.
In the next experiment, we investigated the purification of
the His
6-tagged retroviral vectors with a Ni-NTA column. The
experiments were conducted under conditions identical to those
reported in Table
1. Unlike the nontagged retroviral vectors,
the His
6-tagged retroviral vectors were almost completely retained
in the column. Only about 1% of the viruses were detected in
the flowthrough fraction (Table
1). These experiments provided
fundamental evidence that the His
6 peptide inserted in the PRR
region was not only accessible to its antibody, but also offered
a high binding affinity for the immobilized nickel. Subsequently,
we determined the optimal conditions for IMAC purification of
the His
6-tagged retroviral vectors. We used 10
x PBS buffer to
adjust the vector supernatants to pH 7.3. To wash away nonspecifically
or weakly bound proteins and other contaminants from the Ni-NTA
column, we included 10 mM imidazole in the washing buffer. It
was postulated that the His
6-tagged viral vectors could be eluted
from the Ni-NTA column by either reducing the pH in the elution
buffer or by increasing the concentration of imidazole in the
elution buffer. Based on the data accumulated in the protein
purification, we expected that the His
6-tagged viral vectors
would completely dissociate from the Ni-NTA by raising the imidazole
concentration to 100 to

250 mM in the elution buffer.
We first employed 150 mM imidazole to elute the viral vectors from the Ni-NTA column. Approximately 35% of the viral vectors were recovered (Table 2). To determine what caused the low recovery rate, we assessed the effect of imidazole on the viral titer. We found that the viral titers were reduced nearly 75% when the vectors were exposed to 150 mM imidazole for 20 min at room temperature (Table 3). Exposure of the vectors to higher concentrations of imidazole led to a further decline in the viral titers. The vectors retained high titers when exposed to a lower concentration of imidazole. Exposure of the vectors to 75 mM imidazole for 20 min at room temperature resulted in only a 40% reduction in the viral titers. No decline in titers was observed when the vectors were exposed to 40 mM imidazole for 20 min at room temperature. Accordingly, recovery of the vectors in the IMAC purification could be improved by eluting the vectors with lower concentrations of imidazole. In the next experiment, we employed 75 mM imidazole to elute the vectors from the Ni-NTA column. About 56% of the vectors were recovered in an elution buffer containing 75 mM imidazole (Table 2). However, a further decrease in the concentration of imidazole in the elution buffer did not result in an increase in the recovery rate. As shown in Table 2, no vectors were recovered when 40 mM imidazole was employed to elute the vectors. We speculated that the low recovery rate when 40 mM imidazole was used for elution was caused by the retention of the vectors onto the column in a lower concentration of imidazole because of the high affinity of the His6-tagged retroviral vectors. To determine this effect, a 50 mM EDTA solution was passed through the column after the elution of the vectors with 40 mM imidazole. EDTA chelated the nickel ions and removed them from the NTA groups together with the His6-tagged viral vectors. About 36% of the vectors were recovered in the EDTA elution, indicating retention of the His6-tagged retroviral vectors onto the column when 40 mM imidazole was used for elution. It was felt that the lack of complete recovery of the vectors in the EDTA elution might have been the result of inactivation of the vectors in the presence of EDTA. The effect of EDTA on vector infectivity was investigated by incubating the vectors with 50 mM EDTA. We found that the viral titer decreased nearly 79% after exposure of the vectors to EDTA for 20 min at room temperature (data not shown). Thus, the discrepancy between the loaded and recovered viral vectors could be entirely explained by the inhibitory effect of EDTA.
The purity of the retroviral vectors eluted with 75 mM imidazole
was determined by SDS-PAGE assay, protein microassay, and DNA
PicoGreen assay. As shown in Fig.
5, the majority of the protein
contaminants in the vector supernatants were bovine serum proteins
that were introduced in the cell culture medium to improve vector
production. Most of the serum protein contaminants flowed through
the column without any binding to the Ni-NTA matrix (Fig.
5,
lane FT). The weakly bound serum proteins could be efficiently
purified away by washing the column with 10 mM imidazole (Fig.
5, lane W). No protein contaminants were found in the purified
viral supernatants (Fig.
5, lane E2), indicating a high purity
of the IMAC-purified vector supernatants. Protein assay revealed
that the concentration of protein contaminants in the vector
supernatants before purification was 8.4 mg/ml in total (Table
4). It dropped down to 0.23 mg/ml in the first elution fraction
and 7 µg/ml in the second elution fraction, indicating
a 1,229-fold reduction in protein contamination in the purified
vector supernatants. The second elution fraction contained most
of the recovered viral vectors. The DNA assay showed that the
concentration of DNA contaminants in the vector supernatants
before purification was 0.17 µg/ml. About 59% of DNA contaminants
flowed through the column without any binding to the Ni-NTA
matrix. Nearly all of the weakly bound DNA contaminants were
purified away in the washing step, because we could not detect
any DNA contaminants in the purified vector supernatants in
the PicoGreen DNA assay. The lowest concentration of DNA that
can be determined by the PicoGreen DNA assay is 25 pg/ml. We,
therefore, estimated that a 6,800-fold reduction in the DNA
contamination level was achieved in the one-step IMAC purification.
We also explored the possibility of elution of the His
6-tagged
retroviral vector by reducing the pH of the elution buffer.
It has been shown that histidine residues in the His
6 peptide
have a pKa of approximately 6.0. The histidine residues become
protonated if the pH is reduced to 4.5 to 5.3. Our investigators
have demonstrated that MuLV vectors remain infectious in the
pH range from 5.5 to 8.0 (
40). Accordingly, we investigated
the elution of the viral vectors under those pH values. As shown
in Table
5, no vectors were eluted from the Ni-NTA column even
at low pH. Although most of the DNA contaminants were removed
from the vector supernatants, protein contaminants were still
present in all elution fractions, indicating the inability to
remove protein contaminants under the pH range that we have
examined. The SDS-PAGE assay confirmed this result (data not
shown). Consequently, changing the pH of the elution buffer
is not a good option for eluting His
6-tagged vectors from a
Ni-NTA column, because of the difficulty in removing all contaminated
proteins from the vector supernatants without inactivating the
viral particles.

DISCUSSION
The comparison of different methods for preparation of purified
retroviral vector supernatants is presented in Table
6. Although
the retroviral vectors can be highly concentrated by treating
the vector supernatants with centrifugation or hollow fiber
filtration, the presence of large molecular contaminants or
cosedimentation of contaminants leads to a concern over the
safety of the vector supernatants for in vivo administration.
Chromatography could be an excellent technique for purification
of retroviral vectors, since most protein and DNA contaminants
could be eliminated from the purified vector supernatants. Compared
to these methods, IMAC purification provides a titer higher
than 1.2
x 10
6 CFU/ml and a 56% recovery rate. Of significance,
this method costs less and can easily be scaled up.
Serum proteins with a smaller number of accessible histidine
residues as well as amino acids that possess electron-donating
groups can compete with the His
6-tagged viral vectors for binding
sites, resulting in a weak binding of these components to the
Ni-NTA matrix. However, these interactions are much weaker than
the binding of the His
6-tagged retroviral vectors to the Ni-NTA
matrix. Indeed, we demonstrated that both protein and DNA contaminants
could be efficiently purified away from the Ni-NTA column by
inclusion of 10 mM imidazole in the washing buffer. The presence
of imidazole and the possibility of leakage of nickel in the
purified vector supernatants could be of some concern. Nevertheless,
they can be readily removed by dialysis, as these molecules
are very small. Coupling a dialysis process to IMAC purification
could provide another advantage to allow for the delivery of
the purified viral vectors to a preferred buffer for in vivo
administration. We have tested the effect of dialysis on the
infectivity of the purified viruses. The viruses were dialyzed
against PBS buffer with the volume ratio of 1:1,000 (volume
of virus in the dialysis membrane/volume of PBS buffer used
for dialysis). The dialysis was carried out for 3 h at 4°C
with two exchanges of dialysis buffer. We found no reduction
in the viral titer after dialysis (data not shown).
In summary, we established that retroviral vectors can be purified by IMAC with a Ni-NTA column through the surface-displayed His6 tag, which endows the viral vectors with an increased affinity for the immobilized nickel. These results serve as a proof of principle that the impurities and/or contaminants introduced in the manufacture of retroviral vectors can be efficiently eliminated from the vector supernatants by IMAC. To apply this technology for preparation of clinical-grade retroviral vectors for human gene therapy applications, it may be necessary to engineer a His6-tagged amphotropic or a His6-tagged GalV Env. Obviously, the elimination of contaminants from the retroviral vector supernatants would significantly improve the safety and reproducibility of therapeutic effect of retroviral vectors in human gene therapy.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Paula M. Cannon (Norris Cancer and Department of Biochemistry
and Molecular Biology, University of Southern California School
of Medicine) for providing the plasmid E/A-PRR. We thank Ali
Qzuer (Molecular Genetics and Biochemistry Department, University
of Pittsburgh), who helped with the nucleic acid assay.

FOOTNOTES
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Center for Biotechnology and Bioengineering, Department of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh, 300 Technology Dr., Suite 410, Pittsburgh, PA 15260. Phone: (412) 383-7132. Fax: (412) 383-9710. E-mail:
kaiming{at}pitt.edu.

Present address: College of Engineering, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521. 

REFERENCES
1 - Aboud, M., M. Wolfson, Y. Hassan, and M. Huleihel. 1982. Rapid purification of extracellular and intracellular Moloney murine leukemia virus. Arch. Virol. 71:185-195.[CrossRef][Medline]
2 - Andreadis, S. T., C. M. Roth, J. M. Le Doux, J. R. Morgan, and M. L. Yarmush. 1999. Large-scale processing of recombinant retroviruses for gene therapy. Biotechnol. Prog. 15:1-11.[CrossRef][Medline]
3 - Balliet, J. W., and P. Bates. 1998. Efficient infection mediated by viral receptors incorporated into retroviral particles. J. Virol. 72:671-676.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
4 - Battini, J. L., P. Rodrigues, R. Muller, O. Danos, and J. M. Heard. 1996. Receptor-binding properties of a purified fragment of the 4070A amphotropic murine leukemia virus envelope glycoprotein. J. Virol. 70:4387-4393.[Abstract]
5 - Braas, G., P. F. Searle, N. K. Slater, and A. Lyddiatt. 1996. Strategies for the isolation and purification of retroviral vectors for gene therapy. Bioseparation 6:211-228.[Medline]
6 - Burns, J. C., T. Friedmann, W. Driever, M. Burrascano, and J. K. Yee. 1993. Vesicular stomatitis virus G glycoprotein pseudotyped retroviral vectors: concentration to very high titer and efficient gene transfer into mammalian and nonmammalian cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90:8033-8037.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
7 - Chen, J., L. Reeves, N. Sanburn, J. Croop, D. A. Williams, and K. Cornetta. 2001. Packaging cell line DNA contamination of vector supernatants: implication for laboratory and clinical research. Virology 282:186-197.[CrossRef][Medline]
8 - Chu, T. H., and R. Dornburg. 1997. Toward highly efficient cell-type-specific gene transfer with retroviral vectors displaying single-chain antibodies. J. Virol. 71:720-725.[Abstract]
9 - Crowe, J., H. Dobeli, R. Gentz, E. Hochuli, D. Stuber, and K. Henco. 1994. 6xHis-Ni-NTA chromatography as a superior technique in recombinant protein expression/purification. Methods Mol. Biol. 31:371-387.[Medline]
10 - Darling, D., C. Hughes, J. Galea-Lauri, J. Gaken, I. D. Trayner, M. Kuiper, and F. Farzaneh. 2000. Low-speed centrifugation of retroviral vectors absorbed to a particulate substrate: a highly effective means of enhancing retroviral titer. Gene Ther. 7:914-923.[CrossRef][Medline]
11 - Fontenot, J. D., N. Tjandra, C. Ho, P. C. Andrews, and R. C. Montelaro. 1994. Structure and self assembly of a retrovirus (FeLV) proline rich neutralization domain. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 11:821-836.[Medline]
12 - Gray, K. D., and M. J. Roth. 1993. Mutational analysis of the envelope gene of Moloney murine leukemia virus. J. Virol. 67:3489-3496.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13 - Hammar, L., and G. Gilljam. 1990. Extraction of HIV-1 in aqueous two-phase systems to obtain a high yield of gp120. AIDS Res. Hum. Retrovir. 6:1379-1388.[Medline]
14 - Hammar, L. 1994. Concentration of biomaterials: virus concentration and viral protein isolation. Methods Enzymol. 228:640-658.[Medline]
15 - Izard, J. W., and D. A. Kendall. 1994. Signal peptides: exquisitely designed transport promoters. Mol. Microbiol. 13:765-773.[CrossRef][Medline]
16 - Karger, A., B. Bettin, H. Granzow, and T. C. Mettenleiter. 1998. Simple and rapid purification of alphaherpesviruses by chromatography on a cation exchange membrane. J. Virol. Methods 70:219-224.[CrossRef][Medline]
17 - Koch, W., G. Hunsmann, and R. Friedrich. 1983. Nucleotide sequence of the envelope gene of Friend murine leukemia virus. J. Virol. 45:1-9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
18 - Kuiper, M., R. M. Sanches, J. A. Walford, and N. K. Slater. 2002. Purification of a functional gene therapy vector derived from Moloney murine leukemia virus using membrane filtration and ceramic hydroxyapatite chromatography. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 80:445-453.[CrossRef][Medline]
19 - Le Doux, J. M., J. R. Morgan, R. G. Snow, and M. L. Yarmush. 1996. Proteoglycans secreted by packaging cell lines inhibit retrovirus infection. J. Virol. 70:6468-6473.[Abstract]
20 - Le Doux, J. M., J. R. Morgan, and M. L. Yarmush. 1998. Removal of proteoglycans increases efficiency of retroviral gene transfer. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 58:23-34.[CrossRef][Medline]
21 - Lowy, D. R. 1985. Transformation and oncogenesis: retroviruses, p. 237. In B. N. Field, J. L. Knipe, R. M. Melnick, and B. Roizman (ed.), Virology. Raven Press, New York, N.Y.
22 - Lyddiatt, A., and D. A. O'Sullivan. 1998. Biochemical recovery and purification of gene therapy vectors. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 9:177-185.[CrossRef][Medline]
23 - MacKrell, A. J., N. W. Soong, C. M. Curtis, and W. F. Anderson. 1996. Identification of a subdomain in the Moloney murine leukemia virus envelope protein involved in receptor binding. J. Virol. 70:1768-1774.[Abstract]
24 - McGrath, M., O. Witte, T. Pincus, and I. L. Weissman. 1978. Retrovirus purification: method that conserves envelope glycoprotein and maximizes infectivity. J. Virol. 25:923-927.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
25 - Morgan, R. A., O. Nussbaum, D. D. Muenchau, L. Shu, L. Couture, and W. F. Anderson. 1993. Analysis of the functional and host range-determining regions of the murine ecotropic and amphotropic retrovirus envelope proteins. J. Virol. 67:4712-4721.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
26 - Morling, F. J., and S. J. Russell. 1995. Enhanced transduction efficiency of retroviral vectors coprecipitated with calcium phosphate. Gene Ther. 2:504-508.[Medline]
27 - O'Neil, P. F., and E. S. Balkovic. 1993. Virus harvesting and affinity-based liquid chromatography. A method for virus concentration and purification. Biotechnology 11:173-178.[CrossRef][Medline]
28 - Ott, D., R. Friedrich, and A. Rein. 1990. Sequence analysis of amphotropic and 10A1 murine leukemia viruses: close relationship to mink cell focus-inducing viruses. J. Virol. 64:757-766.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
29 - Paul, R. W., D. Morris, B. W. Hess, J. Dunn, and R. W. Overell. 1993. Increased viral titer through concentration of viral harvests from retroviral packaging lines. Hum. Gene Ther. 4:609-615.[Medline]
30 - Pinter, A., and W. J. Honnen. 1988. O-linked glycosylation of retroviral envelope gene products. J. Virol. 62:1016-1021.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
31 - Pinter, A., R. Kopelman, Z. Li, S. C. Kayman, and D. A. Sanders. 1997. Localization of the labile disulfide bond between SU and TM of the murine leukemia virus envelope protein complex to a highly conserved CWLC motif in SU that resembles the active-site sequence of thiol-disulfide exchange enzymes. J. Virol. 71:8073-8077.[Abstract]
32 - Porath, J., J. Carlsson, I. Olsson, and G. Belfrage. 1975. Metal chelate affinity chromatography, a new approach to protein fractionation. Nature 258:598-599.[CrossRef][Medline]
33 - Rothenberg, S. M., M. N. Olsen, L. C. Laurent, R. A. Crowley, and P. O. Brown. 2001. Comprehensive mutational analysis of the Moloney murine leukemia virus envelope protein. J. Virol. 75:11851-11862.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
34 - Saha, K., Y. C. Lin, and P. K. Wong. 1994. A simple method for obtaining highly viable virus from culture supernatant. J. Virol. Methods 46:349-352.[CrossRef][Medline]
35 - Schulz, T. F., B. A. Jameson, L. Lopalco, A. G. Siccardi, R. A. Weiss, and J. P. Moore. 1992. Conserved structural features in the interaction between retroviral surface and transmembrane glycoproteins? AIDS Res. Hum. Retrovir. 8:1571-1580.[Medline]
36 - Spear, G. T., N. S. Lurain, C. J. Parker, M. Ghassemi, G. H. Payne, and M. Saifuddin. 1995. Host cell-derived complement control proteins CD55 and CD59 are incorporated into the virions of two unrelated enveloped viruses. Human T cell leukemia/lymphoma virus type I (HTLV-I) and human cytomegalovirus (HCMV). J. Immunol. 155:4376-4381.[Abstract]
37 - Weimin Wu, B., P. M. Cannon, E. M. Gordon, F. L. Hall, and W. F. Anderson. 1998. Characterization of the proline-rich region of murine leukemia virus envelope protein. J. Virol. 72:5383-5391.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
38 - Witte, O. N., and D. F. Wirth. 1979. Structure of the murine leukemia virus envelope glycoprotein precursor. J. Virol. 29:735-743.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
39 - Wu, B. W., J. Lu, T. K. Gallaher, W. F. Anderson, and P. M. Cannon. 2000. Identification of regions in the Moloney murine leukemia virus SU protein that tolerate the insertion of an integrin-binding peptide. Virology 269:7-17.[CrossRef][Medline]
40 - Ye, K., H. K. Dhiman, J. Suhan, and J. S. Schultz. 2003. Effect of pH on infectivity and morphology of ecotropic Moloney murine leukemia virus. Biotechnol. Prog. 19:538-543.[CrossRef][Medline]
41 - Ye, K., S. Jin, and S. J. Schultz. 2004. Genetically engineered fluorescent cell marker for labeling CD34+ hematopoietic stem cells. Biotechnol. Prog. 20:561-565.[CrossRef][Medline]
Journal of Virology, September 2004, p. 9820-9827, Vol. 78, No. 18
0022-538X/04/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JVI.78.18.9820-9827.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Yu, J. H., Schaffer, D. V.
(2006). Selection of novel vesicular stomatitis virus glycoprotein variants from a Peptide insertion library for enhanced purification of retroviral and lentiviral vectors.. J. Virol.
80: 3285-3292
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Zhang, B., Jin, S., Jin, J., Li, F., Montelaro, R. C.
(2005). A tumor necrosis factor receptor family protein serves as a cellular receptor for the macrophage-tropic equine lentivirus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
102: 9918-9923
[Abstract]
[Full Text]