The innate immune system in drosophila and mammals senses the invasion of microorganisms using the family of Toll receptors, stimulation of which initiates a range of host defense mechanisms. In drosophila antimicrobial responses rely on two signaling pathways: the Toll pathway and the IMD pathway. In mammals there are at least 10 members of the Toll-like receptor (TLR) family that recognize specific components conserved among microorganisms. Activation of the TLRs leads not only to the induction of inflammatory responses but also to the development of antigen-specific adaptive immunity. The TLR-induced inflammatory response is dependent on a common signaling pathway that is mediated by the adaptor molecule MyD88. However, there is evidence for additional pathways that mediate TLR ligand-specific biological responses.

Toll-like receptors.

Tremendous progress has been made in understanding the molecular basis of the antiviral actions of interferons (IFNs), as well as strategies evolved by viruses to antagonize the actions of IFNs. Furthermore, advances made while elucidating the IFN system have contributed significantly to our understanding in multiple areas of virology and molecular cell biology, ranging from pathways of signal transduction to the biochemical mechanisms of transcriptional and translational control to the molecular basis of viral pathogenesis. IFNs are approved therapeutics and have moved from the basic research laboratory to the clinic. Among the IFN-induced proteins important in the antiviral actions of IFNs are the RNA-dependent protein kinase (PKR), the 2',5'-oligoadenylate synthetase (OAS) and RNase L, and the Mx protein GTPases. Double-stranded RNA plays a central role in modulating protein phosphorylation and RNA degradation catalyzed by the IFN-inducible PKR kinase and the 2'-5'-oligoadenylate-dependent RNase L, respectively, and also in RNA editing by the IFN-inducible RNA-specific adenosine deaminase (ADAR1). IFN also induces a form of inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS2) and the major histocompatibility complex class I and II proteins, all of which play important roles in immune response to infections. Several additional genes whose expression profiles are altered in response to IFN treatment and virus infection have been identified by microarray analyses. The availability of cDNA and genomic clones for many of the components of the IFN system, including IFN-alpha, IFN-beta, and IFN-gamma, their receptors, Jak and Stat and IRF signal transduction components, and proteins such as PKR, 2',5'-OAS, Mx, and ADAR, whose expression is regulated by IFNs, has permitted the generation of mutant proteins, cells that overexpress different forms of the proteins, and animals in which their expression has been disrupted by targeted gene disruption. The use of these IFN system reagents, both in cell culture and in whole animals, continues to provide important contributions to our understanding of the virus-host interaction and cellular antiviral response.

Antiviral Actions of Interferons

Since the discovery of interferons (IFNs), considerable progress has been made in describing the nature of the cytokines themselves, the signalling components that direct the cell response and their antiviral activities. Gene targeting studies have distinguished four main effector pathways of the IFN-mediated antiviral response: the Mx GTPase pathway, the 2',5'-oligoadenylate-synthetase-directed ribonuclease L pathway, the protein kinase R pathway and the ISG15 ubiquitin-like pathway. As discussed in this Review, these effector pathways individually block viral transcription, degrade viral RNA, inhibit translation and modify protein function to control all steps of viral replication. Ongoing research continues to expose additional activities for these effector proteins and has revealed unanticipated functions of the antiviral response.

Interferon-inducible antiviral effectors

The interferon (IFN) system is an extremely powerful antiviral response that is capable of controlling most, if not all, virus infections in the absence of adaptive immunity. However, viruses can still replicate and cause disease in vivo, because they have some strategy for at least partially circumventing the IFN response. We reviewed this topic in 2000 [Goodbourn, S., Didcock, L. & Randall, R. E. (2000). J Gen Virol 81, 2341-2364] but, since then, a great deal has been discovered about the molecular mechanisms of the IFN response and how different viruses circumvent it. This information is of fundamental interest, but may also have practical application in the design and manufacture of attenuated virus vaccines and the development of novel antiviral drugs. In the first part of this review, we describe how viruses activate the IFN system, how IFNs induce transcription of their target genes and the mechanism of action of IFN-induced proteins with antiviral action. In the second part, we describe how viruses circumvent the IFN response. Here, we reflect upon possible consequences for both the virus and host of the different strategies that viruses have evolved and discuss whether certain viruses have exploited the IFN response to modulate their life cycle (e.g. to establish and maintain persistent/latent infections), whether perturbation of the IFN response by persistent infections can lead to chronic disease, and the importance of the IFN system as a species barrier to virus infections. Lastly, we briefly describe applied aspects that arise from an increase in our knowledge in this area, including vaccine design and manufacture, the development of novel antiviral drugs and the use of IFN-sensitive oncolytic viruses in the treatment of cancer.

Interferons and viruses: an interplay between induction, signalling, antiviral responses and virus countermeasures.

In response to diverse stress stimuli, eukaryotic cells activate a common adaptive pathway, termed the integrated stress response (ISR), to restore cellular homeostasis. The core event in this pathway is the phosphorylation of eukaryotic translation initiation factor 2 alpha (eIF2α) by one of four members of the eIF2α kinase family, which leads to a decrease in global protein synthesis and the induction of selected genes, including the transcription factor ATF4, that together promote cellular recovery. The gene expression program activated by the ISR optimizes the cellular response to stress and is dependent on the cellular context, as well as on the nature and intensity of the stress stimuli. Although the ISR is primarily a pro‐survival, homeostatic program, exposure to severe stress can drive signaling toward cell death. Here, we review current understanding of the ISR signaling and how it regulates cell fate under diverse types of stress.

https://www.embopress.org/doi/pdf/10.15252/embr.201642195

Ha Truong

Papers

Essential Role for the dsRNA-Dependent Protein Kinase PKR in Innate Immunity to Viral Infection