4.6 Article

Role of p38 Protein Kinase in the Ligand-independent Ubiquitination and Down-regulation of the IFNAR1 Chain of Type I Interferon Receptor

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 286, 期 25, 页码 22069-22076

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M111.238766

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [CA92900, CA142425, CA94214, CA104838]
  2. Pennsylvania Department of Health

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Phosphorylation-dependent ubiquitination and degradation of the IFNAR1 chain of type I interferon (IFN) receptor is a robust and specific mechanism that limits the magnitude and duration of IFN alpha/beta signaling. Besides the ligand-inducible IFNAR1 degradation, the existence of an inside-out signaling that accelerates IFNAR1 turnover in the cells undergoing the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress and activated unfolded protein responses has been recently described. The latter pathway does not require either presence of ligands (IFN alpha/beta) or catalytic activity of Janus kinases (JAK). Instead, this pathway relies on activation of the PKR-like ER kinase (PERK) and ensuing specific priming phosphorylation of IFNAR1. Here, we describe studies that identify the stress activated p38 protein kinase as an important regulator of IFNAR1 that acts downstream of PERK. Results of the experiments using pharmacologic p38 kinase inhibitors, RNA interference approach, and cells from p38 alpha knock-out mice suggest that p38 kinase activity is required for priming phosphorylation of IFNAR1 in cells undergoing unfolded protein response. We further demonstrate an important role of p38 kinase in the ligand-independent stimulation of IFNAR1 ubiquitination and degradation and ensuing attenuation of IFN alpha/beta signaling and anti-viral defenses. We discuss the distinct importance of p38 kinase in regulating the overall responses to type I IFN in cells that have been already exposed to IFN alpha/beta versus those cells that are yet to encounter these cytokines.

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

4.6
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