4.6 Article

Endoplasmic reticulum stress stimulates heme oxygenase-1 gene expression in vascular smooth muscle - Role in cell survival

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 280, 期 2, 页码 872-877

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M410413200

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL59976, HL62467, HL36045] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1) is a cytoprotective protein that catalyzes the degradation of heme to biliverdin, iron, and carbon monoxide ( CO). In the present study, we found that endoplasmic reticulum ( ER) stress induced by a variety of experimental agents stimulated a time- and concentration-dependent increase in HO-1 mRNA and protein in vascular smooth muscle cells (SMC). The induction of HO-1 by ER stress was blocked by actinomycin D or cycloheximide and was independent of any changes in HO-1 mRNA stability. Luciferase reporter assays indicated that ER stress stimulated HO-1 promoter activity via the antioxidant response element. Moreover, ER stress induced the nuclear import of Nrf2 and the binding of Nrf2 to the HO-1 antioxidant response element. Interestingly, ER stress stimulated SMC apoptosis, as demonstrated by annexin V binding, caspase-3 activation, and DNA laddering. The induction of apoptosis by ER stress was potentiated by HO inhibition, whereas it was prevented by addition of HO substrate. In addition, exposure of SMC to exogenously administered CO inhibited ER stress-mediated apoptosis, and this was associated with a decrease in the expression of the proapoptotic protein, GADD153. In contrast, the other HO- 1 products failed to block apoptosis or GADD153 expression during ER stress. These results demonstrated that ER stress is an inducer of HO-1 gene expression in vascular SMC and that HO-1-derived CO acts in an autocrine fashion to inhibit SMC apoptosis. The capacity of ER stress to stimulate the HO-1/CO system provides a novel mechanism by which this organelle regulates cell survival.

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