In the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), secretory and transmembrane proteins fold into their native conformation and undergo posttranslational modifications important for their activity and structure. When protein folding in the ER is inhibited, signal transduction pathways, which increase the biosynthetic capacity and decrease the biosynthetic burden of the ER to maintain the homeostasis of this organelle, are activated. These pathways are called the unfolded protein response (UPR). In this review, we briefly summarize principles of protein folding and molecular chaperone function important for a mechanistic understanding of UPR-signaling events. We then discuss mechanisms of signal transduction employed by the UPR in mammals and our current understanding of the remodeling of cellular processes by the UPR. Finally, we summarize data that demonstrate that UPR signaling feeds into decision making in other processes previously thought to be unrelated to ER function, e.g., eukaryotic starvation responses and differentiation programs.

The mammalian unfolded protein response

Conformational diseases are caused by mutations altering the folding pathway or final conformation of a protein. Many conformational diseases are caused by mutations in secretory proteins and reach from metabolic diseases, e.g. diabetes, to developmental and neurological diseases, e.g. Alzheimer's disease. Expression of mutant proteins disrupts protein folding in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), causes ER stress, and activates a signaling network called the unfolded protein response (UPR). The UPR increases the biosynthetic capacity of the secretory pathway through upregulation of ER chaperone and foldase expression. In addition, the UPR decreases the biosynthetic burden of the secretory pathway by downregulating expression of genes encoding secreted proteins. Here we review our current understanding of how an unfolded protein signal is generated, sensed, transmitted across the ER membrane, and how downstream events in this stress response are regulated. We propose a model in which the activity of UPR signaling pathways reflects the biosynthetic activity of the ER. We summarize data that shows that this information is integrated into control of cellular events, which were previously not considered to be under control of ER signaling pathways, e.g. execution of differentiation and starvation programs.

/pdf/er-stress-and-the-unfolded-protein-response-1uesskyggq.pdf

ER stress and the unfolded protein response.

In response to environmental stresses, a family of protein kinases phosphorylate eIF2 (eukaryotic initiation factor 2) to alleviate cellular injury or alternatively induce apoptosis. Phosphorylation of eIF2 reduces global translation, allowing cells to conserve resources and to initiate a reconfiguration of gene expression to effectively manage stress conditions. Accompanying this general protein synthesis control, eIF2 phosphorylation induces translation of specific mRNAs, such as that encoding the bZIP (basic leucine zipper) transcriptional regulator ATF4 (activating transcription factor 4). ATF4 also enhances the expression of additional transcription factors, ATF3 and CHOP (CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein homologous protein)/GADD153 (growth arrest and DNA-damage-inducible protein), that assist in the regulation of genes involved in metabolism, the redox status of the cells and apoptosis. Reduced translation by eIF2 phosphorylation can also lead to activation of stress-related transcription factors, such as NF-kappaB (nuclear factor kappaB), by lowering the steady-state levels of short-lived regulatory proteins such as IkappaB (inhibitor of NF-kappaB). While many of the genes induced by eIF2 phosphorylation are shared between different environmental stresses, eIF2 kinases function in conjunction with other stress-response pathways, such as those regulated by mitogen-activated protein kinases, to elicit gene expression programmes that are tailored for the specific stress condition. Loss of eIF2 kinase pathways can have important health consequences. Mice devoid of the eIF2 kinase GCN2 [general control non-derepressible-2 or EIF2AK4 (eIF2alpha kinase 4)] show sensitivity to nutritional deficiencies and aberrant eating behaviours, and deletion of PEK [pancreatic eIF2alpha kinase or PERK (RNA-dependent protein kinase-like endoplasmic reticulum kinase) or EIF2AK3] leads to neonatal insulin-dependent diabetes, epiphyseal dysplasia and hepatic and renal complications.

Coping with stress: eIF2 kinases and translational control

The molecular biology and nomenclature of the activating transcription factor/cAMP responsive element binding family of transcription factors: activating transcription factor proteins and homeostasis

The double-stranded RNA-dependent protein kinase PKR is a critical mediator of the antiproliferative and antiviral effects exerted by interferons. Not only is PKR an effector molecule on the cellular response to double-stranded RNA, but it also integrates signals in response to Toll-like receptor activation, growth factors, and diverse cellular stresses. In this review, we provide a detailed picture on how signaling downstream of PKR unfolds and what are the ultimate consequences for the cell fate. PKR activation affects both transcription and translation. PKR phosphorylation of the alpha subunit of eukaryotic initiation factor 2 results in a blockade on translation initiation. However, PKR cannot avoid the translation of some cellular and viral mRNAs bearing special features in their 5′ untranslated regions. In addition, PKR affects diverse transcriptional factors such as interferon regulatory factor 1, STATs, p53, activating transcription factor 3, and NF-κB. In particular, how PKR triggers a cascade of events involving IKK phosphorylation of IκB and NF-κB nuclear translocation has been intensively studied. At the cellular and organism levels PKR exerts antiproliferative effects, and it is a key antiviral agent. A point of convergence in both effects is that PKR activation results in apoptosis induction. The extent and strength of the antiviral action of PKR are clearly understood by the findings that unrelated viral proteins of animal viruses have evolved to inhibit PKR action by using diverse strategies. The case for the pathological consequences of the antiproliferative action of PKR is less understood, but therapeutic strategies aimed at targeting PKR are beginning to offer promising results.

https://mmbr.asm.org/content/mmbr/70/4/1032.full.pdf

Impact of Protein Kinase PKR in Cell Biology: from Antiviral to Antiproliferative Action

The purpose of this review is to discuss ATF3, a member of the ATF/CREB family of transcription factors, and its roles in stress responses. In the introduction, we briefly describe the ATF/CREB family, which contains more than 10 proteins with the basic region-leucine zipper (bZip) DNA binding domain. We summarize their DNA binding and heterodimer formation with other bZip proteins, and discuss the nomenclature of these proteins. Over the years, identical or homologous cDNA clones have been isolated by different laboratories and given different names. We group these proteins into subgroups according to their amino acid similarity; we also list the alternative names for each member, and clarify some potential confusion in the nomenclature of this family of proteins. We then focus on ATF3 and its potential roles in stress responses. We review the evidence that the mRNA level of ATF3 greatly increases when the cells are exposed to stress signals. In animal experiments, the signals include ischemia, ischemia coupled with reperfusion, wounding, axotomy, toxicity, and seizure; in cultured cells, the signals include serum factors, cytokines, genotoxic agents, cell death-inducing agents, and the adenoviral protein E1A. Despite the overwhelming evidence for its induction by stress signals, not much else is known about ATF3. Preliminary results suggest that the JNK/SAPK pathway is involved in the induction of ATF3 by stress signals; in addition, IL-6 and p53 have been demonstrated to be required for the induction of ATF3 under certain conditions. The consequences of inducing ATF3 during stress responses are not clear. Transient transfection and in vitro transcription assays indicate that ATF3 represses transcription as a homodimer; however, ATF3 can activate transcription when coexpressed with its heterodimeric partners or other proteins. Therefore, it is possible that, when induced during stress responses, ATF3 activates some target genes but represses others, depending on the promoter context and cellular context. Even less is understood about the physiological significance of inducing ATF3. We will discuss our preliminary results and some reports by other investigators in this regard.

Derek K. Marsee

Papers

ATF3 and stress responses.