4.8 Article

Slowing ribosome velocity restores folding and function of mutant CFTR

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
卷 129, 期 12, 页码 5236-5253

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL INVESTIGATION INC
DOI: 10.1172/JCI124282

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [F31HL131231, R01HL136414, P30DK072482]
  2. Cystic Fibrosis Foundation [OLIVER17F0, BRAAK-M14XXO, HARTMA15G0, IGNATO17XXO, SORSCH13XXO, SORSCH14XXO]
  3. Burroughs Wellcome Fund [1018774]
  4. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [FOR1805, IG74/14-1, IG74/14-2]
  5. German Cystic Fibrosis Foundation (muko e.V.) [1603]
  6. Netherlands Science Organization

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is caused by mutations in the CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR), with approximately 90% of patients harboring at least one copy of the disease-associated variant F508del. We utilized a yeast phenomic system to identify genetic modifiers of F508del-CFTR biogenesis, from which ribosomal protein L12 (RPL12/uL11) emerged as a molecular target. In the present study, we investigated mechanism(s) by which suppression of RPL12 rescues F508del protein synthesis and activity. Using ribosome profiling, we found that rates of translation initiation and elongation were markedly slowed by RPL12 silencing. However, proteolytic stability and patch-clamp assays revealed RPL12 depletion significantly increased F508del-CFTR steady-state expression, interdomain assembly, and baseline open-channel probability. We next evaluated whether Rpl12-corrected F508del-CFTR could be further enhanced with concomitant pharmacologic repair (e.g., using clinically approved modulators lumacaftor and tezacaftor) and demonstrated additivity of these treatments. Rpl12 knockdown also partially restored maturation of specific CFTR variants in addition to F508del, and WT Cftr biogenesis was enhanced in the pancreas, colon, and ileum of Rpl12 haplosufficient mice. Modulation of ribosome velocity therefore represents a robust method for understanding both CF pathogenesis and therapeutic response.

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

4.8
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