Efficacy of IFN-λ1 to Protect Human Airway Epithelial Cells against Human Rhinovirus 1B Infection

Impaired interferon (IFN) production has been observed in various obstructive respiratory diseases. This contributes to enhanced sensitivity towards viral infections triggering acute exacerbations. To compensate for this impaired host IFN response, there is need to explore new therapeutic strategies, like exogenous administration of IFNs as prophylactic treatment. In the present study, we examined the protective potential of IFN-λ1 and compared it with the previously established protecting effect of IFN-β. A549 cells and human primary bronchial epithelial cells were first treated with either IFN-β (500 IU/ml) or IFN-λ1 (500 ng/ml) for 18 h. For infection, two approaches were adopted: i) Continuous scenario: after pre-treatment, cells were infected immediately for 24 h with human rhinovirus 1B (HRV1B) in IFN-containing medium, or were cultured for another 72 h in IFN-containing medium, and then infected for 24 h with HRV1B, ii) Pre-treatment scenario: IFN-containing medium was replaced after 18 h and cells were infected for 4 h either immediately after pre-treatment or after additional culturing for 72 h in IFN-free medium. The protective effect was evaluated in terms of reduction in the number of viral copies/infectious progeny, and enhanced expression of IFN-stimulated genes (ISGs). In both cell types and in both approaches, IFN-λ1 and IFN-β treatment resulted in pronounced and long-lasting antiviral effects exemplified by significantly reduced viral copy numbers and diminished infectious progeny. This was associated with strong up-regulation of multiple ISGs. However, in contrast to the IFN-β induced expression of ISGs, which decreased over time, expression of ISGs induced by IFN-λ1 was sustained or even increased over time. Here we demonstrate that the protective potential of IFN-λ1 is comparable to IFN-β. Yet, the long-lasting induction of ISGs by IFN-λ1 and most likely less incitement of side effects due to more localized expression of its receptors could make it an even more promising candidate for prophylactic treatment than IFN-β.