4.7 Article

Apoptosis induced by a cytopathic hepatitis A virus is dependent on caspase activation following ribosomal RNA degradation but occurs in the absence of 2′-5′ oligoadenylate synthetase

期刊

ANTIVIRAL RESEARCH
卷 63, 期 3, 页码 153-166

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.antiviral.2004.02.004

关键词

hepatitis A virus; apoptosis; RNA degradation; caspase

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We have presented previously evidence that the cytopathogenic 18f strain of hepatitis A virus (HAV) induced degradation of ribosomal RNA (rRNA) in infected cells [Arch. Virol. 148 (2003) 1275-1300]. In contrast, the non-cytopathogenic parent virus HM 175 clone 1 had no effect on rRNA integrity. We present here data showing that rRNA degradation is followed by apoptosis accompanied by characteristic DNA laddering in the cytoplasm of 18f infected cells. The DNA laddering coincided with the detection of caspase 3 and PARP-1 cleavage and was dependent upon activation of the caspase pathway, since treatment with Z-VAD-FMK, a pan-caspase inhibitor, inhibited both events. RNase L mRNA was present in both virus-infected and uninfected cells. Messenger RNA for the interferon inducible enzyme 2'-5' oligoadenylate synthetase (2'-5' OAS), which polymerizes ATP into 2'-5' oligo adenylate (2-5A, the activator of RNase L) in the presence of double-stranded RNA, was not detected following virus infection. 2-5' OAS mRNA was induced by treatment of the cells with interferon-beta (IFN-beta). IFN-beta mRNA was marginally induced following infection. However, phosphorylated STAT 1, a key regulator of interferon-stimulated gene transcription was not detected in virus infected cells. STAT 1 phosphorylation in response to IFN treatment was lower in virus-infected cells, compared to uninfected cells treated with interferon, suggesting that l8f virus infection interferes with interferon signaling. The results suggest that l8f infection causes the induction of a 2-5A independent RNase L like activity. Published by Elsevier B.V.

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