4.6 Article

Human cytomegalovirus protein US11 provokes an unfolded protein response that may facilitate the degradation of class I major histocompatibility complex products

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
卷 79, 期 5, 页码 2768-2779

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.79.5.2768-2779.2005

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [1P50CA100707, P50 CA100707] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [5R37-AI33456, AI32412, R01 AI032412, R37 AI033456] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) glycoprotein US11 diverts class I major histocompatibility complex (MHC) heavy chains (HC) from the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) to the cytosol, where HC are subjected to proteasome-mediated degradation. In mouse embryonic fibroblasts that are deficient for X-box binding protein 1 (XBP-1), a key transcription factor in the unfolded protein response (UPR) pathway, we show that degradation of endogenous mouse HC is impaired. Moreover, the rate of US11-mediated degradation of ectopically expressed HLA-A2 is reduced when XBP-1 is absent. In the human astrocytoma cell line U373, turning on expression of US11, but not US2, is sufficient to induce a UPR, as manifested by upregulation of the ER chaperone Bip and by splicing of XBP-1 mRNA. In the presence of dominant-negative versions of XBP-1 and activating transcription factor 6, the kinetics of class I MHC HC degradation were delayed when expression of US11 was turned on. The magnitude of these effects, while reproducible, was modest. Conversely, in cells that stably express high levels of US11, the degradation of HC is not affected by the presence of the dominant negative effectors of the UPR. An infection of human foreskin fibroblasts with human cytomegalovirus induced XBP-1 splicing in a manner that coincides with US11 expression. We conclude that the contribution of the UPR is more pronounced on HC degradation shortly after induction of US11 expression and that US11 is sufficient to induce such a 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

4.6
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