4.6 Article

HDAC inhibitor and proteasome inhibitor induce cleavage and exosome-mediated secretion of HSP90 in mouse pluripotent stem cells

期刊

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2022.06.057

关键词

MouseEScells; iPScells; HSP90cleavage; ROS; Fas; Exosome

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the cleavage of HSP90 in mouse pluripotent stem cells. HDAC inhibitors and proteasome inhibitors were found to induce HSP90 cleavage through ROS generation and caspase 10 activation. The cleaved HSP90 was secreted out of the cells via exosome secretion.
Heat shock protein 90 (HSP90), one of the molecular chaperones, stabilizes several proteins necessary to maintain pluripotency of embryonic stem (ES) cells. Recently, we reported that HDAC inhibitors and proteasome inhibitors down-regulate HSP90 activity through HSP90 cleavage induced by reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation and caspase 10 activation in various cancer cells. In this study, we investigated HSP90 cleavage in mouse ES cells. HDAC inhibitors and proteasome inhibitors induced HSP90 cleavage in the mouse ES cell line R1, and the cleaved HSP90 was barely found in the cells and instead secreted out of the cells through the exosome. The HSP90 cleavage was associated with ROS generation and caspase 10 activation. In addition, HDAC inhibitor and proteasome inhibitor induced Fas expression, and the inhi-bition of caspase 8, a downstream molecule of Fas, blocked HSP90 cleavage. Therefore, HDAC inhibitor -and proteasome inhibitor-mediated HSP90 cleavage was induced by ROS generation and Fas expression. We observed similar results in mouse induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells. Taken together, HSP90 cleavage was induced in mouse pluripotent cells similarly to cancer cells but differently regulated through Fas expression and exosomal secretion. These findings will be helpful in elucidating the regu-lation of HSP90 upon stress in pluripotent stem cells.(c) 2022 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.6
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