Lipidic nanoparticles (LNP), particularly liposomes, have been proven to be a successful and versatile platform for intracellular drug delivery for decades. Whilst primarily developed for small molecule delivery, liposomes have recently undergone a renaissance due to their success in vaccination strategies, delivering nucleic acids, in the COVID-19 pandemic. As such, liposomes are increasingly being investigated for the delivery of nucleic acids, beyond mRNA, as non-viral gene delivery vectors. Although not generally considered toxic, liposomes are increasingly shown to not be immunologically inert, which may have advantages in vaccine applications but may limit their use in other conditions where immunological responses may lead to adverse events, particularly those associated with complement activation. We sought to assess a small panel of liposomes varying in a number of physico-chemical characteristics associated with complement activation and inflammatory responses, and examine how basophil-like cells may respond to them. Basophils, as well as other cell types, are involved in the anaphylactic responses to liposomes but are difficult to isolate in sufficient numbers to conduct large scale analysis. Here, we report the use of the human KU812 cell line as a surrogate for primary basophils. Multiple phenotypic markers of activation were assessed, as well as the release of histamine and inflammasome activity within the cells. We found that larger liposomes were more likely to result in KU812 activation, and that non-PEGylated liposomes were potent stimulators of inflammasome activity (four-fold greater IL-1β secretion than untreated controls), and a lower ratio of cholesterol to lipid was also associated with greater IL-1β secretion ([Cholesterol:DSPC ratio] 1:10; 0.35 pg/mL IL-1β vs. 5:10; 0.1 pg/mL). Additionally, PEGylation appeared to be associated with direct KU812 activation. These results suggest possible mechanisms related to the consequences of complement activation that may be underpinned by basophilic cells, in addition to other immune cell types. Investigation of the mechanisms behind these responses, and their impact on use in vivo, are now warranted.

SLC2A1 mediates glucose cellular uptake; key to appropriate immune function. Our previous work has shown efavirenz and lopinavir exposure inhibits T cell and macrophage responses, to known agonists, likely via interactions with glucose transporters. Using human cell lines as a model, we assessed glucose uptake and subsequent bioenergetic profiles, linked to immunological responses. Glucose uptake was measured using 2-deoxyglucose as a surrogate for endogenous glucose, using commercially available reagents. mRNA expression of SLC transporters was investigated using qPCR TaqMan™ gene expression assay. Bioenergetic assessment, on THP-1 cells, utilised the Agilent Seahorse XF Mito Stress test. In silico analysis of potential interactions between SLC2A1 and antiretrovirals was investigated using bioinformatic techniques. Efavirenz and lopinavir exposure was associated with significantly lower glucose accumulation, most notably in THP-1 cells (up to 90% lower and 70% lower with efavirenz and lopinavir, respectively). Bioenergetic assessment showed differences in the rate of ATP production (JATP); efavirenz (4 μg/mL), was shown to reduce JATP by 87% whereas lopinavir (10 μg/mL), was shown to increase the overall JATP by 77%. Putative in silico analysis indicated the antiretrovirals, apart from efavirenz, associated with the binding site of highest binding affinity to SLC2A1, similar to that of glucose. Our data suggest a role for efavirenz and lopinavir in the alteration of glucose accumulation with subsequent alteration of bioenergetic profiles, supporting our hypothesis for their inhibitory effect on immune cell activation. Clarification of the implications of this data, for in vivo immunological responses, is now warranted to define possible consequences for these, and similar, therapeutics.

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2, and the ensuing global pandemic, has resulted in an unprecedented response to identify therapies that can limit uncontrolled inflammation observed in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19. The immune pathology behind COVID-19 is complex and involves the activation and interaction of multiple systems including, but not limited to, complement, inflammasomes, endothelial as well as innate and adaptive immune cells to bring about a convoluted profile of inflammation, coagulation and tissue damage. To date, therapeutic approaches have focussed on inhibition of coagulation, untargeted immune suppression and/or cytokine-directed blocking agents. Regardless of recently achieved improvements in individual patient outcomes and survival rates, improved and focussed approaches targeting individual systems involved is needed to further improve prognosis and wellbeing. This review summarizes the current understanding of molecular and cellular systems involved in the pathophysiology of COVID-19, and their contribution to pathogen clearance and damage to then discuss possible therapeutic options involving immunomodulatory drug delivery systems as well as summarising the complex interplay between them.