4.6 Review

Mechanisms of translocation of ER chaperones to the cell surface and immunomodulatory roles in cancer and autoimmunity

期刊

FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY
卷 5, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2015.00007

关键词

calreticulin; damage associated molecular patterns; ER stress; immunogenic cell death; post-translational modification

类别

资金

  1. Cornwall Arthritis Trust
  2. Northcott Devon Medical Foundation
  3. Dutchy Health Charity
  4. HCED Iraq Ph.D. Studentship
  5. Canadian Institutes of Health Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Endoplasmic reticulum (ER) chaperones (e.g., calreticulin, heat shock proteins, and isomerases) perform a multitude of functions within the ER. However, many of these chaperones can translocate to the cytosol and eventually the surface of cells, particularly during ER stress induced by e.g., drugs, UV irradiation, and microbial stimuli. Once on the cell surface or in the extracellular space, the ER chaperones can take on immunogenic characteristics, as mostly described in the context of cancer, appearing as damage-associated molecular patterns recognized by the immune system. How ER chaperones relocate to the cell surface and interact with other intracellular proteins appears to influence whether a tumor cell is targeted for cell death. The relocation of ER proteins to the cell surface can be exploited to target cancer cells for elimination by immune mechanism. Here we evaluate the evidence for the different mechanisms of ER protein translocation and binding to the cell surface and how ER protein translocation can act as a signal for cancer cells to undergo killing by immunogenic cell death and other cell death pathways.The release of chaperones can also exacerbate underlying autoimmune conditions, such as rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis, and the immunomodulatory role of extracellular chaperones as potential cancer immunotherapies requires cautious monitoring, particularly in cancer patients with underlying autoimmune disease.

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