4.5 Article

Protein repertoire impact of Ubiquitin-Proteasome System impairment: Insight into the protective role of beta-estradiol

期刊

JOURNAL OF PROTEOMICS
卷 75, 期 4, 页码 1440-1453

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jprot.2011.11.014

关键词

Ubiquitin-Proteasome System impairment; Neurodegenerative Diseases; 2-Dimensional Electrophoresis separation; Shotgun Proteomics; Meta-analysis; beta-Estradiol

资金

  1. Rete Nazionale di Proteomica, FIRB [RBRN07BMCT]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Ubiquitin-Proteasome System (UPS) and the Autophagy-Lysosome Pathways (ALP) are key mechanisms for cellular homeostasis sustenance and protein clearance. A wide number of Neurodegenerative Diseases (NDs) are tied with UPS impairment and have been also described as proteinopathies caused by aggregate-prone proteins, not efficiently removed by proteasome. Despite the large knowledge on proteasome biological role, molecular mechanisms associated with its impairment are still blur. We have pursued a comprehensive proteomic investigation to evaluate the phenotypic rearrangements in protein repertoires associated with a UPS blockage. Different functional proteomic approaches have been employed to tackle UPS impairment impact on human NeuroBlastoma (NB) cell lines responsive to proteasome inhibition by Epoxomicin. 2-Dimensional Electrophoresis (2-DE) separation combined with Mass Spectrometry and Shotgun Proteomics experiments have been employed to design a thorough picture of protein profile. Unsupervised meta-analysis of the collected proteomic data revealed that all the identified proteins relate each other in a functional network centered on beta-estradiol. Moreover we showed that treatment of cells with beta-estradiol resulted in aggregate removal and increased cell survival due to activation of the autophagic pathway. Our data may provide the molecular basis for the use of beta-estradiol in neurodegenerative disorders by induction of protein aggregate removal. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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