4.6 Article

MCPIP1 Suppresses Hepatitis C Virus Replication and Negatively Regulates Virus-Induced Proinflammatory Cytokine Responses

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 193, 期 8, 页码 4159-4168

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1400337

关键词

-

资金

  1. Taipei Medical University Grants [TMU101-AE1-B52, 100 TMU-TMUH-10]
  2. National Science Council Grants [NSC 100-2320-B-038-033, NSC 102-2320-B-038-036, NSC 99-2628B- 038-008-MY2, NSC 98-2320-B-038-005-MY3, NSC 1012320- B-038-017-MY3]
  3. Jin-lung-yuan Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human MCP-1-induced protein 1 (MCPIP1, also known as ZC3H12A and Regnase-1) plays important roles in negatively regulating the cellular inflammatory response. Recently, we found that as an RNase, MCPIP1 has broad-spectrum antiviral effects by targeting viral RNA. In this study, we demonstrated that MCPIP1 expression was induced by hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in Huh7.5 hepatoma cells. MCPIP1 expression was higher in liver tissue from patients with chronic HCV infection compared with those without chronic HCV infection. Knockdown of MCPIP1 increased HCV replication and HCV-mediated expression of proinflammatory cytokines, such as TNF-alpha, IL-6, and MCP-1. However, overexpression of MCPIP1 significantly inhibited HCV replication and HCV-mediated expression of proinflammatory cytokines. Various mutants of functional domains of MCPIP1 showed disruption of the RNA binding and oligomerization abilities, as well as RNase activity, but not deubiquitinase activity, which impaired the inhibitory activity against HCV replication. On immunocytochemistry, MCPIP1 colocalized with HCV RNA. Use of a replication-defective HCV John Cunningham 1/AAG mutant and in vitro RNA cleavage assay demonstrated that MCPIP1 could directly degrade HCV RNA. MCPIP1 may suppress HCV replication and HCV-mediated proinflammatory responses with infection, which might contribute to the regulation of host defense against the infection and virus-induced inflammation.

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