4.5 Article

Phosphatidylcholine Transfer Protein Interacts with Thioesterase Superfamily Member 2 to Attenuate Insulin Signaling

期刊

SCIENCE SIGNALING
卷 6, 期 286, 页码 -

出版社

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/scisignal.2004111

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [DK56626, DK48873, CA122617, HL46457, HL48743, DK080789]
  2. Harvard Digestive Diseases Center [P30 DK34854]
  3. Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award [DK093195]
  4. American Liver Foundation Congressman John Joseph Moakley Postdoctoral Research Fellowship Award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Phosphatidylcholine transfer protein (PC-TP) is a phospholipid-binding protein that is enriched in liver and that interacts with thioesterase superfamily member 2 (THEM2). Mice lacking either protein exhibit improved hepatic glucose homeostasis and are resistant to diet-induced diabetes. Insulin receptor substrate 2 (IRS2) and mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) are key effectors of insulin signaling, which is attenuated in diabetes. We found that PC-TP inhibited IRS2, as evidenced by insulin-independent IRS2 activation after knockdown, genetic ablation, or chemical inhibition of PC-TP. In addition, IRS2 was activated after knockdown of THEM2, providing support for a role for the interaction of PC-TP with THEM2 in suppressing insulin signaling. Additionally, we showed that PC-TP bound to tuberous sclerosis complex 2 (TSC2) and stabilized the components of the TSC1-TSC2 complex, which functions to inhibit mTORC1. Preventing phosphatidylcholine from binding to PC-TP disrupted interactions of PC-TP with THEM2 and TSC2, and disruption of the PC-TP-THEM2 complex was associated with increased activation of both IRS2 and mTORC1. In livers of mice with genetic ablation of PC-TP or that had been treated with a PC-TP inhibitor, steady-state amounts of IRS2 were increased, whereas those of TSC2 were decreased. These findings reveal a phospholipid-dependent mechanism that suppresses insulin signaling downstream of its receptor.

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