IRAK2 directs stimulus-dependent nuclear export of inflammatory mRNAs

  1. Hao Zhou
  2. Katarzyna Bulek
  3. Xiao Li
  4. Tomasz Herjan
  5. Minjia Yu
  6. Wen Qian
  7. Han Wang
  8. Gao Zhou
  9. Xing Chen
  10. Hui Yang
  11. Lingzi Hong
  12. Junjie Zhao
  13. Luke Qin
  14. Koichi Fukuda
  15. Annette Flotho
  16. Ji Gao
  17. Ashok Dongre
  18. Julie A Carman
  19. Zizhen Kang
  20. Bing Su
  21. Timothy S Kern
  22. Jonathan D Smith
  23. Thomas A Hamilton
  24. Frauke Melchior
  25. Paul L Fox
  26. Xiaoxia Li  Is a corresponding author
  1. Cleveland Clinic, United States
  2. Stanford University School of Medicine, United States
  3. Zentrum für Molekulare Biologie der Universität Heidelberg, Germany
  4. Bristol-Myers Squibb, United States
  5. Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, China
  6. Case Western Reserve University, United States

Abstract

Expression of inflammatory genes is determined in part by post-transcriptional regulation of mRNA metabolism but how stimulus- and transcript-dependent nuclear export influence is poorly understood. Here we report a novel pathway in which LPS/TLR4 engagement promotes nuclear localization of IRAK2 to facilitate nuclear export of a specific subset of inflammation related mRNAs for translation in murine macrophages. IRAK2 kinase activity is required for LPS-induced RanBP2-mediated IRAK2 sumoylation and subsequent nuclear translocation. Array analysis showed that an SRSF1 binding motif is enriched in mRNAs dependent on IRAK2 for nuclear export. Nuclear IRAK2 phosphorylates SRSF1 to reduce its binding to target mRNAs, which promotes the RNA binding of the nuclear export adaptor ALYREF and nuclear export receptor Nxf1 loading for the export of the mRNAs. In summary, LPS activates a nuclear function of IRAK2 that facilitates the assembly of nuclear export machinery to export selected inflammatory mRNAs to the cytoplasm for translation.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Hao Zhou

    Department of Immunology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Katarzyna Bulek

    Department of Immunology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Xiao Li

    Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Tomasz Herjan

    Department of Immunology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Minjia Yu

    Department of Immunology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Wen Qian

    Department of Immunology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Han Wang

    Department of Immunology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Gao Zhou

    Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Xing Chen

    Department of Immunology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Hui Yang

    Department of Immunology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Lingzi Hong

    Department of Immunology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Junjie Zhao

    Department of Immunology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Luke Qin

    Department of Immunology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Koichi Fukuda

    Department of Molecular Cardiology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Annette Flotho

    Zentrum für Molekulare Biologie der Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Ji Gao

    Discovery Biology, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Ashok Dongre

    Discovery Biology, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Julie A Carman

    Discovery Biology, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Zizhen Kang

    Department of Immunology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  20. Bing Su

    Shanghai Institute of Immunology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  21. Timothy S Kern

    School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  22. Jonathan D Smith

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  23. Thomas A Hamilton

    Department of Immunology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  24. Frauke Melchior

    Zentrum für Molekulare Biologie der Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9546-8797
  25. Paul L Fox

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  26. Xiaoxia Li

    Department of Immunology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    For correspondence
    lix@ccf.org
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4872-9525

Funding

National Multiple Sclerosis Society (RG5130A2/1)

  • Xiaoxia Li

National Institutes of Health (2PO1HL029582)

  • Xiaoxia Li

American Diabetes Association (Postdoctoral Research Fellow Award,1-16-PDF-138)

  • Hao Zhou

National Science Centre, Poland (2015/19/B/NZ6/01578)

  • Katarzyna Bulek

National Institutes of Health (PO1CA062220)

  • Xiaoxia Li

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This study was performed in strict accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health. All procedures using animals were approved by the Cleveland Clinic Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (Protocol Number: 2014-1229 and 2017-1814) .

Copyright

© 2017, Zhou et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Hao Zhou
  2. Katarzyna Bulek
  3. Xiao Li
  4. Tomasz Herjan
  5. Minjia Yu
  6. Wen Qian
  7. Han Wang
  8. Gao Zhou
  9. Xing Chen
  10. Hui Yang
  11. Lingzi Hong
  12. Junjie Zhao
  13. Luke Qin
  14. Koichi Fukuda
  15. Annette Flotho
  16. Ji Gao
  17. Ashok Dongre
  18. Julie A Carman
  19. Zizhen Kang
  20. Bing Su
  21. Timothy S Kern
  22. Jonathan D Smith
  23. Thomas A Hamilton
  24. Frauke Melchior
  25. Paul L Fox
  26. Xiaoxia Li
(2017)
IRAK2 directs stimulus-dependent nuclear export of inflammatory mRNAs
eLife 6:e29630.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.29630

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.29630

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    Rachel Pudlowski, Lingyi Xu ... Jennifer T Wang
    Research Advance

    Centrioles have a unique, conserved architecture formed by three linked, ‘triplet’, microtubules arranged in ninefold symmetry. The mechanisms by which these triplet microtubules are formed remain unclear but likely involve the noncanonical tubulins delta-tubulin and epsilon-tubulin. Previously, we found that human cells lacking delta-tubulin or epsilon-tubulin form abnormal centrioles, characterized by an absence of triplet microtubules, lack of central core protein POC5, and a futile cycle of centriole formation and disintegration (Wang et al., 2017). Here, we show that human cells lacking either TEDC1 or TEDC2 have similar abnormalities. Using ultrastructure expansion microscopy, we observed that mutant centrioles elongate to the same length as control centrioles in G2 phase and fail to recruit central core scaffold proteins. Remarkably, mutant centrioles also have an expanded proximal region. During mitosis, these mutant centrioles further elongate before fragmenting and disintegrating. All four proteins physically interact and TEDC1 and TEDC2 can form a subcomplex in the absence of the tubulins, supporting an AlphaFold Multimer model of the tetramer. TEDC1 and TEDC2 localize to centrosomes and are mutually dependent on each other and on delta-tubulin and epsilon-tubulin for localization. Our results demonstrate that delta-tubulin, epsilon-tubulin, TEDC1, and TEDC2 function together to promote robust centriole architecture, laying the foundation for future studies on the mechanisms underlying the assembly of triplet microtubules and their interactions with centriole structure.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Zuzana Outla, Gizem Oyman-Eyrilmez ... Martin Gregor
    Research Article

    The most common primary malignancy of the liver, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), is a heterogeneous tumor entity with high metastatic potential and complex pathophysiology. Increasing evidence suggests that tissue mechanics plays a critical role in tumor onset and progression. Here, we show that plectin, a major cytoskeletal crosslinker protein, plays a crucial role in mechanical homeostasis and mechanosensitive oncogenic signaling that drives hepatocarcinogenesis. Our expression analyses revealed elevated plectin levels in liver tumors, which correlated with poor prognosis for HCC patients. Using autochthonous and orthotopic mouse models we demonstrated that genetic and pharmacological inactivation of plectin potently suppressed the initiation and growth of HCC. Moreover, plectin targeting potently inhibited the invasion potential of human HCC cells and reduced their metastatic outgrowth in the lung. Proteomic and phosphoproteomic profiling linked plectin-dependent disruption of cytoskeletal networks to attenuation of oncogenic FAK, MAPK/Erk, and PI3K/Akt signatures. Importantly, by combining cell line-based and murine HCC models, we show that plectin inhibitor plecstatin-1 (PST) is well-tolerated and potently inhibits HCC progression. In conclusion, our study demonstrates that plectin-controlled cytoarchitecture is a key determinant of HCC development and suggests that pharmacologically induced disruption of mechanical homeostasis may represent a new therapeutic strategy for HCC treatment.