4.6 Article

SIRT3 Protein Deacetylates Isocitrate Dehydrogenase 2 (IDH2) and Regulates Mitochondrial Redox Status

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 287, 期 17, 页码 14078-14086

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M112.355206

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [GM065386]
  2. National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mitochondria play a central role in oxidative energy metabolism and age-related diseases such as cancer. Accumulation of spurious oxidative damage can cause cellular dysfunction. Antioxidant pathways that rely on NADPH are needed for the reduction of glutathione and maintenance of proper redox status. The mitochondrial matrix protein isocitrate dehydrogenase 2 (IDH2) is a major source of NADPH. Previously, we demonstrated that the NAD(+)-dependent deacetylase SIRT3 was essential for the prevention of age-related hearing loss in mice fed a calorically restricted diet. Here we provide direct biochemical and biological evidence establishing an exquisite regulatory relationship between IDH2 and SIRT3 under acute and chronic caloric restriction. The regulated site of acetylation was mapped to Lys-413, an evolutionarily invariant residue. Site-specific, genetic incorporation of N-e-acetyllysine into position 413 of IDH2 revealed that acetylated IDH2 displays a dramatic 44-fold loss in activity. Deacetylation by SIRT3 fully restored maximum IDH2 activity. The ability of SIRT3 to protect cells from oxidative stress was dependent on IDH2, and the deacetylated mimic, IDH2(K413R) variant was able to protect Sirt3(-/-) mouse embryonic fibroblasts from oxidative stress through increased reduced glutathione levels. Together these results uncover a previously unknown mechanism by which SIRT3 regulates IDH2 under dietary restriction. Recent findings demonstrate that IDH2 activities are a major factor in cancer, and as such, these results implicate SIRT3 as a potential regulator of IDH2-dependent functions in cancer cell metabolism.

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