About: MDA5 is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 740 publications have been published within this topic receiving 80681 citations. The topic is also known as: DEAD/H (Asp-Glu-Ala-Asp/His) box polypeptide & MDA-5.
TL;DR: The data suggest that cells with high basal Oas gene expression levels can activate RNase L and thereby inhibit virus replication early in infection upon exposure to viral double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) before the induction of interferon and prior to transcription ofInterferon-stimulated antiviral genes.
Abstract: The oligoadenylate synthetase (OAS)-RNase L pathway is a potent interferon (IFN)-induced antiviral activity. Upon sensing double-stranded RNA, OAS produces 2′,5′-oligoadenylates (2-5A), which activate RNase L. Murine coronavirus (mouse hepatitis virus [MHV]) nonstructural protein 2 (ns2) is a 2′,5′-phosphodiesterase (PDE) that cleaves 2-5A, thereby antagonizing RNase L activation. PDE activity is required for robust replication in myeloid cells, as a mutant of MHV (ns2 H126R ) encoding an inactive PDE fails to antagonize RNase L activation and replicates poorly in bone marrow-derived macrophages (BMM), while ns2 H126R replicates to high titer in several types of nonmyeloid cells, as well as in IFN receptor-deficient ( Ifnar1 −/− ) BMM. We reported previously that myeloid cells express significantly higher basal levels of OAS transcripts than nonmyeloid cells. Here, we investigated the contributions of Oas gene expression, basal IFN signaling, and virus-induced IFN to RNase L activation. Infection with ns2 H126R activated RNase L in Ifih1 −/− BMM to a similar extent as in wild-type (WT) BMM, despite the lack of IFN induction in the absence of MDA5 expression. However, ns2 H126R failed to induce RNase L activation in BMM treated with IFNAR1-blocking antibody, as well as in Ifnar1 −/− BMM, both expressing low basal levels of Oas genes. Thus, activation of RNase L does not require virus-induced IFN but rather correlates with adequate levels of basal Oas gene expression, maintained by basal IFN signaling. Finally, overexpression of RNase L is not sufficient to compensate for inadequate basal OAS levels. IMPORTANCE The oligoadenylate synthetase (OAS)-RNase L pathway is a potent antiviral activity. Activation of RNase L during murine coronavirus (mouse hepatitis virus [MHV]) infection of myeloid cells correlates with high basal Oas gene expression and is independent of virus-induced interferon secretion. Thus, our data suggest that cells with high basal Oas gene expression levels can activate RNase L and thereby inhibit virus replication early in infection upon exposure to viral double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) before the induction of interferon and prior to transcription of interferon-stimulated antiviral genes. These findings challenge the notion that activation of the OAS-RNase L pathway requires virus to induce type I IFN, which in turn upregulates OAS gene expression, as well as to provide dsRNA to activate OAS. Our data further suggest that myeloid cells may serve as sentinels to restrict viral replication, thus protecting other cell types from infection.
TL;DR: Results strongly suggest that MG-T could be linked to a viral infection, and clearly demonstrate INF-I overexpression together with the activation of innate immunity pathways in thymoma-associated MG suggesting that MG might develop after a pathogen infection.
TL;DR: An understanding of the differences and similarities in the early innate immune responses to these infections is likely to provide important insights into the mechanism underlying the long-term persistence of HCV.
Abstract: Hepatitis A and hepatitis C viruses (HAV and HCV) are both positive-strand ribonucleic acid (RNA) viruses with hepatotropic lifestyles. Despite several important differences, they share many biological and molecular features and similar genome replication schemes. Despite this, HAV infections are usually effectively controlled by the host with elimination of the virus, whereas HCV most often is able to establish lifelong persistent infection. The mechanisms underlying this difference are unknown. The cellular helicases RIG-I and MDA5, and Toll-like receptor 3, are pattern recognition receptors that sense virus-derived RNAs within hepatocytes in the liver. Activation of these receptors leads to their interaction with specific adaptor proteins, mitochondrial antiviral signaling protein (MAVS) and TIR-domain-containing adapter-inducing interferon-β (TRIF), respectively, which engage downstream kinases to activate two crucial transcription factors, nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) and interferon regulatory factor 3 (IRF3). This results in the induction of interferons (IFNs) and IFN-stimulated genes that ultimately establish an antiviral state. These signaling pathways are central to host antiviral defense and thus frequent targets for viral interference. Both HAV and HCV express proteases that target signal transduction through these pathways and that block the induction of IFNs upon sensing of viral RNA by these receptors. An understanding of the differences and similarities in the early innate immune responses to these infections is likely to provide important insights into the mechanism underlying the long-term persistence of HCV.
TL;DR: The results identify an innate mechanism by which antibodies develop during viral disease and identify RLR ligands as potent adjuvants for TFH-promoting vaccination strategies.
Abstract: Follicular T helper cells (TFH) are fundamental in orchestrating effective antibody-mediated responses critical for immunity against viral infections and effective vaccines. However, it is unclear how virus infection leads to TFH induction. We here show that dengue virus (DENV) infection of human dendritic cells (DCs) drives TFH formation via crosstalk of RIG-I-like receptor (RLR) RIG-I and MDA5 with type I Interferon (IFN) signaling. DENV infection leads to RLR-dependent IKKe activation, which phosphorylates IFNα/β receptor-induced STAT1 to drive IL-27 production via the transcriptional complex ISGF3. Inhibiting RLR activation as well as neutralizing antibodies against IL-27 prevented TFH formation. DENV-induced CXCR5+PD-1+Bcl-6+ TFH cells secreted IL-21 and activated B cells to produce IgM and IgG. Notably, RLR activation by synthetic ligands also induced IL-27 secretion and TFH polarization. These results identify an innate mechanism by which antibodies develop during viral disease and identify RLR ligands as potent adjuvants for TFH-promoting vaccination strategies.
TL;DR: The mechanisms of type I IFN induction and its role in host defense are largely unclear, but studies with the Gram-positive intracellular bacterium Listeria monocytogenes indicated that it may trigger type IIFN induction through novel TLR-independent intrACEllular receptors and type I IfN may play a detrimental role to host response against listerial infection.
Abstract: Type I interferons (IFNs) were first described several decades ago as soluble factors that were capable of 'interfering' with viral replication when added to infected cells. Type I IFNs have been shown to be induced by recognition of viral DNA and RNA via three distinct pathways: (i) a TRIF-dependent pathway in macrophages via TLRs 3 and 4; (ii) a MyD88-dependent pathway in plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs) via TLRs 7/8 and 9; and (iii) an intracellular recognition pathway utilizing the cytoplasmic receptors RIG-I/MDA5. Interestingly, these viral recognition pathways converge on TRAF3, which induces interferon through the activation of IRF3 or IRF7 by the TBK-1 and IKKi complexes. While type I IFN has been traditionally associated with antiviral responses, recent studies have demonstrated that many bacteria also induce type I interferon responses. The mechanisms of type I IFN induction and its role in host defense, however, are largely unclear. Studies with the Gram-positive intracellular bacterium Listeria monocytogenes indicated that it may trigger type I IFN induction through novel TLR-independent intracellular receptors and type I IFN may play a detrimental role to host response against listerial infection. In this article, we summarize some of these findings and discuss the functional differences of type I IFNs in bacterial and viral infections.