4.7 Article

Upregulated Proteasome Subunits in COVID-19 Patients: A Link with Hypoxemia, Lymphopenia and Inflammation

期刊

BIOMOLECULES
卷 12, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/biom12030442

关键词

COVID-19; proteasome subunits; hypoxemia; lymphopenia; hyperinflammation

资金

  1. Health Research Fund (Fondo de Investigacion Sanitario [FIS])-European Regional Development Fund (FEDER), Spain [PI19/01612, COV20/00207, PI19-01363]
  2. ISCIII [CP18/00028]
  3. ESF, Investing in your future

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study suggests that hypoxia may induce the overexpression of proteasome genes in COVID-19 patients, which is associated with lymphocyte count reduction, increased inflammatory markers, and clinical complications.
Severe COVID-19 disease leads to hypoxemia, inflammation and lymphopenia. Viral infection induces cellular stress and causes the activation of the innate immune response. The ubiquitin-proteasome system (UPS) is highly implicated in viral immune response regulation. The main function of the proteasome is protein degradation in its active form, which recognises and binds to ubiquitylated proteins. Some proteasome subunits have been reported to be upregulated under hypoxic and hyperinflammatory conditions. Here, we conducted a prospective cohort study of COVID-19 patients (n = 44) and age-and sex-matched controls (n = 20). In this study, we suggested that hypoxia could induce the overexpression of certain genes encoding for subunits from the alpha and beta core of the 20S proteasome and from regulatory particles (19S and 11S) in COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, the gene expression of proteasome subunits was associated with lymphocyte count reduction and positively correlated with inflammatory molecular and clinical markers. Given the importance of the proteasome in maintaining cellular homeostasis, including the regulation of the apoptotic and pyroptotic pathways, these results provide a potential link between COVID-19 complications and proteasome gene expression.

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

4.7
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