4.7 Article

Human autoimmune sera as molecular probes for the identification of an autoantigen kinase signaling pathway

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE
卷 196, 期 9, 页码 1213-1225

出版社

ROCKEFELLER UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1084/jem.20021167

关键词

apoptosis; autoantibodies; autoimmunity; kinase; RNA splicing

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [K08AI01521] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [U19 DK061934, U19-DK61934] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using human autoimmune sera as molecular probes, we previously described the association of phosphorylated serine/arginine splicing factors (SR splicing factors) with the U1-small nuclear ribonucleoprotein (U1-snRNP) and U3-small nucleolar RNP (snoRNP) in apoptotic cells. SR proteins are highly conserved autoantigens whose activity is tightly regulated by reversible phosphorylation of serine residues by at least eight different SR protein kinase kinases (SRPKs), including SRPK1, SRPK2, and the scleroderma autoantigen topoisomerase I. In this report, we demonstrate that only one of the known SRPKs, SRPK1, is associated with the U1-snRNP autoantigen complex in healthy and apoptotic cells. SRPK1 is activated early during apoptosis, followed by caspase-mediated proteolytic inactivation at later time points. SRPKs are cleaved in vivo after multiple apoptotic stimuli, and cleavage can be inhibited by overexpression of bcl-2 and bcl-x(L), and by exposure to soluble peptide caspase inhibitors. Incubation of recombinant caspases with in vitro-translated SRPKs demonstrates that SRPK1 and SRPK2 are in vitro substrates for caspases-8 and -9, respectively. In contrast, topoisomerase I is cleaved by downstream caspases (-3 and -6). Since each of these SRPKs sits at a distinct checkpoint in the caspase cascade, SRPKs may serve an important role in signaling pathways governing apoptosis, alternative mRNA splicing, SR protein trafficking, RNA stability, and possibly the generation of autoantibodies directed against splicing factors.

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