4.7 Article

SARS-CoV-2 main protease suppresses type I interferon production by preventing nuclear translocation of phosphorylated IRF3

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
卷 17, 期 6, 页码 1547-1554

出版社

IVYSPRING INT PUBL
DOI: 10.7150/ijbs.59943

关键词

SARS-CoV; SARS-CoV-2; NSP5; 3C-like protease; type I interferons; IRF3

资金

  1. Hong Kong Research Grants Council [C714220GF]
  2. Hong Kong Health and Medical Research Fund [COVID190114]
  3. Sanming Project of Medicine of Shenzhen [SZSM201911014]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Both SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 use NSPS proteins to antagonize IFN production, with variants like G15S and K90R retaining this antagonistic property.
Suppression of type I interferon (IFN) response is one pathological outcome of the infection of highly pathogenic human coronaviruses. To effect this, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and SARS-CoV-2 encode multiple IFN antagonists. In this study, we reported on the IFN antagonism of SARS-CoV-2 main protease NSPS. NSPS proteins of both SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 counteracted Sendai virus-induced IFN production. NSPS variants G15S and K90R commonly seen in circulating strains of SARS-CoV-2 retained the IFN-antagonizing property. The suppressive effect of NSPS on IFN-beta gene transcription induced by RIG-I, MAYS, TBK1 and IKKE suggested that NSPS likely acts at a step downstream of IRF3 phosphorylation in the cytoplasm. NSPS did not influence steady-state expression or phosphorylation of IRF3, suggesting that IRF3, regardless of its phosphorylation state, might not be the substrate of NSPS protease. However, nuclear translocation of phosphorylated IRF3 was severely compromised in NSPS-expressing cells. Taken together, our work revealed a new mechanism by which NSPS proteins encoded by SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 antagonize IFN production by retaining phosphorylated IRF3 in the cytoplasm. Our findings have implications in rational design and development of antiviral agents against SARS-CoV-2.

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