4.6 Article

Opposing Roles for TRAF1 in the Alternative versus Classical NF-κB Pathway in T Cells

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 287, 期 27, 页码 23010-23019

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M112.350538

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Cancer Society [018119]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

T cells lacking TRAF1 hyperproliferate in response to T cell receptor signaling but have impaired signaling downstream of specific TNFR family members such as 4-1BB. Here we resolve this paradox by showing that while TRAF1 is required for maximal activation of the classical NF-kappa B pathway downstream of 4-1BB in primary T cells, TRAF1 also restricts the constitutive activation of NIK in anti-CD3-activated T cells. Activation of the alternative NF-kappa B pathway is restricted in unstimulated cells by a cIAP1/2:TRAF2:TRAF3:NIK complex. Using knockdown of NIK by siRNA we show that in activated CD8 T cells TRAF1 is also involved in this process and that constitutive activation of the alternative NF-kappa B pathway is responsible for costimulation independent hyperproliferation and excess cytokine production in TRAF1-deficient CD8 T cells compared with WT CD8 T cells. The T cell costimulatory molecule 4-1BB critically regulates the survival of activated and memory CD8 T cells. We demonstrate that stimulation through 4-1BB induces cIAP1-dependent TRAF3 degradation and activation of the alternative NF-kappa B pathway. We also show that while both TRAF1 and cIAP1 have non-redundant roles in suppressing the alternative NF-kappa B pathway in T cells activated in the absence of costimulation, activation of the classical NF-kappa B pathway downstream of 4-1BB requires TRAF1, whereas cIAP1 plays a redundant role with cIAP2. Collectively these results demonstrate that TRAF1 plays a critical role in regulating T cell activation both through restricting the costimulation independent activation of NIK in activated T cells and by promoting the 4-1BB-induced classical NF-kappa B pathway.

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