Article

Viral targeting of DEAD box protein 3 reveals its role in TBK1/IKKepsilon-mediated IRF activation.

Viral Immune Evasion Group, School of Biochemistry and Immunology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
The EMBO Journal (Impact Factor: 10.75). 08/2008; 27(15):2147-57. DOI: 10.1038/emboj.2008.143
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Viruses are detected by different classes of pattern recognition receptors (PRRs), such as Toll-like receptors and RIG-like helicases. Engagement of PRRs leads to activation of interferon (IFN)-regulatory factor 3 (IRF3) and IRF7 through IKKepsilon and TBK1 and consequently IFN-beta induction. Vaccinia virus (VACV) encodes proteins that manipulate host signalling, sometimes by targeting uncharacterised proteins. Here, we describe a novel VACV protein, K7, which can inhibit PRR-induced IFN-beta induction by preventing TBK1/IKKepsilon-mediated IRF activation. We identified DEAD box protein 3 (DDX3) as a host target of K7. Expression of DDX3 enhanced Ifnb promoter induction by TBK1/IKKepsilon, whereas knockdown of DDX3 inhibited this, and virus- or dsRNA-induced IRF3 activation. Further, dominant-negative DDX3 inhibited virus-, dsRNA- and cytosolic DNA-stimulated Ccl5 promoter induction, which is also TBK1/IKKepsilon dependent. Both K7 binding and enhancement of Ifnb induction mapped to the N-terminus of DDX3. Furthermore, virus infection induced an association between DDX3 and IKKepsilon. Therefore, this study shows for the first time the involvement of a DEAD box helicase in TBK1/IKKepsilon-mediated IRF activation and Ifnb promoter induction.

0 Followers
 · 
191 Views
  • Source
    Fish &amp Shellfish Immunology 03/2015; · 3.03 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cells undergoing an endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress response called the “Unfolded Protein Response” (UPR) produce synergistically augmented IFN-β when stimulated with pattern recognition receptor agonists such as lipopolysaccharide (LPS). Previous studies revealed increased IRF3 at ifnb1 genetic regulatory elements during ER stress; however the underlying mechanism was unclear [1]. In this study we sought to determine whether ER stress directly activated IRF3.Methods This study was conducted in murine macrophages (primary and RAW264.7) and STING−/− or +/+ murine embryonic fibroblasts. IRF3 activation was monitored by immunofluorescence microscopy and western blot detection of S386 and S396 respectively as well as IRF3 nuclear translocation. IRF3 regulated gene expression was detected by quantitative PCR. TBK1 family kinases were inhibited with MRT67307. Site-1 protease cleavage of ATF6 was blocked with AEBSF.ResultsOxygen-glucose deprivation and multiple pharmacologic UPR inducers triggered the phosphorylation (S386) and nuclear translocation of IRF3, even in the absence of exogenous LPS. UPR induction also enhanced LPS-dependent phosphorylation of IRF3 at S396. Consistent with IRF3 activation, ER stress augmented LPS-dependent induction of several IRF3 regulated genes (IFN-β, IFN-α4, and CXCL10) but not others (ISG54, RANTES). Further mechanistic dissection revealed differences among UPR inducers: IRF3 phosphorylation due to calcium-mobilizing ER stress (thapsigargin or A23187) critically depended upon Stimulator of interferon gene (STING) and Tank-binding kinase (TBK1). However, calcium mobilization alone by ionomycin was insufficient for IRF3 phosphorylation. STING was also necessary for optimal synergistic induction of IFN-βby thapsigargin and LPS. In contrast, non-calcium-dependent forms of ER stress (e.g., tunicamycin treatment, oxygen glucose deprivation, 2-deoxyglucose) promoted IRF3 phosphorylation independently of STING and TBK1. Rather, IRF3 phosphorylation and synergistic IFN-βinduction by these UPR inducers was abrogated by AEBSF, an inhibitor of ATF6 processing. AEBSF had no effect on thapsigargin induced IRF3 phosphorylation or IFN-β synergy.Conclusion Discrete IRF3 activating pathways were identified for different types of ER stress that involved either STING/TBK1 or Site-1 specific proteases (e.g. ATF6). The activation of STING by ER stress has not been described. Although ER stress is not sufficient for expression of IRF3-regulated genes, activation of IRF3 by the UPR plays a critical role in augmenting LPS-dependent expression, as interference in this process severely impacted IFN-β induction. These data have implications for diseases involving ER stress and type I IFN.
    Cytokine 09/2012; 59(3):560-561. DOI:10.1016/j.cyto.2012.06.221 · 2.87 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Tyrosine phosphorylation is a hallmark for activation of Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription (STAT) proteins, but their transcriptional activity also depends on other secondary modifications. Type I interferons (IFNs) can activate both the ISGF3 (STAT1:STAT2:IRF9) complex and STAT3, but with cell-specific, selective triggering of only the ISGF3 transcriptional program.Methods Simultaneous treatment with IFNa2 and Trichostatin A, as well as combined HDAC1/HDAC2 silencing, restores STAT3-dependent reporter gene and endogenous genes expression, strongly suggesting that HDAC1 and HDAC2 are directly involved in repressing IFNa-activated STAT3. We used the IFN-dependent STAT3 transcriptional blockade as read-out for a genome-wide RNAi repressor screen.ResultsQuite significantly, we identified multiple partners of the Sin3a/HDAC transcriptional repressor complex as negative regulators of STAT3 transcriptional activity, regardless to the STAT3 activating stimulus. Sin3a directly interacts with STAT3 and controls its acetylation status, its nuclear accumulation and DNA binding, strongly influencing the transcription of a subset of STAT3-responsive genes. Conversely, Sin3a is required for ISGF3-dependent gene transcription and for an efficient IFN-mediated antiviral protection against influenza A and hepatitis C viruses.Conclusion The Sin3a complex therefore acts as a context-dependent ISGF3/STAT3 transcriptional switch.
    Cytokine 09/2012; 59(3):561. DOI:10.1016/j.cyto.2012.06.223 · 2.87 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
57 Downloads
Available from
May 20, 2014