4.5 Article

Lowe syndrome patient fibroblasts display Ocrl1-specific cell migration defects that cannot be rescued by the homologous Inpp5b phosphatase

期刊

HUMAN MOLECULAR GENETICS
卷 18, 期 23, 页码 4478-4491

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/hmg/ddp407

关键词

-

资金

  1. Lowe Syndrome Trust (UK) [CA/PU/LSTJAN03]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Lowe syndrome (LS) is a life-threatening, developmental disease characterized by mental retardation, cataracts and renal failure. Although this human illness has been linked to defective function of the phosphatidylinositol 5-phosphatase, Ocrl1 (Oculo-Cerebro-Renal syndrome of Lowe protein 1), the mechanism by which this enzyme deficiency triggers the disease is not clear. Ocrl1 is known to localize mainly to the Golgi apparatus and endosomes, however it translocates to plasma membrane ruffles upon cell stimulation with growth factors. The functional implications of this inducible translocation to the plasma membrane are presently unknown. Here we show that Ocrl1 is required for proper cell migration, spreading and fluid-phase uptake in both established cell lines and human dermal fibroblasts. We found that primary fibroblasts from two patients diagnosed with LS displayed defects in these cellular processes. Importantly, these abnormalities were suppressed by expressing wild-type Ocrl1 but not by a phosphatase-deficient mutant. Interestingly, the homologous human PI-5-phosphatase, Inpp5b, was unable to complement the Ocrl1-dependent cell migration defect. Further, Ocrl1 variants that cannot bind the endocytic adaptor AP2 or clathrin, like Inpp5b, were less apt to rescue the migration phenotype. However, no defect in membrane recruitment of AP2/clathrin or in transferrin endocytosis by patient cells was detected. Collectively, our results suggest that Ocrl1, but not Inpp5b, is involved in ruffle-mediated membrane remodeling. Our results provide new elements for understanding how Ocrl1 deficiency leads to the abnormalities associated with the LS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据