4.5 Review

The molecular regulation of Janus kinase (JAK) activation

期刊

BIOCHEMICAL JOURNAL
卷 462, 期 -, 页码 1-13

出版社

PORTLAND PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.1042/BJ20140712

关键词

cytokine receptor; kinase; Janus kinase (JAK); pseudokinase

资金

  1. Australian Research Council
  2. NHMRC (National Health and Medical Research Council)
  3. Leukaemia Foundation
  4. Australian Stem Cell Centre
  5. NHMRC [1011804]
  6. National Institutes of Health, U.S.A. [CA22556]
  7. Victorian State Government Operational Infrastructure Scheme
  8. NHMRC IRIISS grant [361646]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The JAK (Janus kinase) family members serve essential roles as the intracellular signalling effectors of cytokine receptors. This family, comprising JAK1, JAK2, JAK3 and TYK2 (tyrosine kinase 2), was first described more than 20 years ago, but the complexities underlying their activation, regulation and pleiotropic signalling functions are still being explored. Here, we review the current knowledge of their physiological functions and the causative role of activating and inactivating JAK mutations in human diseases, including haemopoietic malignancies, immunodeficiency and inflammatory diseases. At the molecular level, recent studies have greatly advanced our knowledge of the structures and organization of the component FERM (4.1/ezrin/radixin/moesin)-SH2 (Src homology 2), pseudokinase and kinase domains within the JAKs, the mechanism of JAK activation and, in particular, the role of the pseudokinase domain as a suppressor of the adjacent tyrosine kinase domain's catalytic activity. We also review recent advances in our understanding of the mechanisms of negative regulation exerted by the SH2 domain-containing proteins, SOCS (suppressors of cytokine signalling) proteins and LNK. These recent studies highlight the diversity of regulatory mechanisms utilized by the JAK family to maintain signalling fidelity, and suggest alternative therapeutic strategies to complement existing ATP-competitive kinase inhibitors.

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

4.5
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