4.5 Article

Caspase-2 is essential for c-Jun transcriptional activation and Bim induction in neuron death

期刊

BIOCHEMICAL JOURNAL
卷 455, 期 -, 页码 15-25

出版社

PORTLAND PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.1042/BJ20130556

关键词

beta-amyloid; Bcl-2-interacting mediator of cell death (Bim); caspase-2; nerve growth factor (NGF); neurons; RIP (receptor-interacting protein)-associated ICH-1 [ICE (interleuldn-1 beta-converting enzyme)/CED-3 (cell-death; determining 3) homologue 1] protein with a death domain (RAIDD)

资金

  1. NIH [2R01NS043089, 5R01NS033689]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Neuronal apoptotic death generally requires de novo transcription, and activation of the transcription factor c-Jun has been shown to be necessary in multiple neuronal death paradigms. Caspase-2 has been implicated in death of neuronal and non-neuronal cells, but its relationship to transcriptional activation has not been clearly elucidated. In the present study, using two different neuronal apoptotic paradigms, beta-amyloid treatment and NGF (nerve growth factor) withdrawal, we examined the hierarchical role of caspase-2 activation in the transcriptional control of neuron death. Both paradigms induce rapid activation of caspase-2 as well as activation of the transcription factor c-Jun and subsequent induction of the pro-apoptotic BH3 (Bcl-homology domain 3)-only protein Bim (Bcl-2-interacting mediator of cell death). Caspase-2 activation is dependent on the adaptor protein RAIDD {RIP (receptor-interacting protein)-associated ICH-1 [ICE (interleukin-1 beta-converting enzyme)/CED-3 (cell-death determining 3) homologue 1] protein with a death domain}, and both caspase-2 and RAIDD are required for c-Jun activation and Bim induction. The present study thus shows that rapid caspase-2 activation is essential for c-Jun activation and Bim induction in neurons subjected to apoptotic stimuli. This places caspase-2 at an apical position in the apoptotic cascade and demonstrates for the first time that caspase-2 can regulate transcription.

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