Skip to main content
Journal of Zhejiang University (Medical Sciences) logoLink to Journal of Zhejiang University (Medical Sciences)
. 2024 Jan 19;53(1):35–46. [Article in Chinese] doi: 10.3724/zdxbyxb-2023-0480

核酸免疫识别的机制和功能及酪氨酸磷酸化修饰调控

Advancements in tyrosine kinase-mediated regulation of innate nucleic acid sensing

LIU Shengduo 1,2,✉,2, XU Pinglong 1,2,3,4
Editors: 沈 敏, 刘 丽娜
PMCID: PMC10945499  PMID: 38426691

Abstract

Innate nucleic acid sensing is a ubiquitous and highly conserved immunological process, which is pivotal for monitoring and responding to pathogenic invasion and cellular damage, and central to host defense, autoimmunity, cell fate determination and tumorigenesis. Tyrosine phosphorylation, a major type of post-translational modification, plays a critical regulatory role in innate immune sensing pathway. Core members of nucleic acid sensing signaling pathway, such as cyclic guanosine monophosphate-adenosine monophosphate synthase (cGAS), stimulator of interferon genes (STING), and TANK binding kinase 1 (TBK1), are all subject to activity regulation triggered by tyrosine phosphorylation, thereby affecting the host antiviral defense and anti-tumor immunity under physiological or pathological conditions. This review summarizes the recent advances in research on tyrosine kinases and tyrosine phosphorylation in regulation of nucleic acid sensing. The function and potential applications of targeting tyrosine phosphorylation in anti-tumor immunity is disussed to provide insights for understanding and expanding new anti-tumor strategies.

Keywords: Innate immunity, Tumor immunity, Tyrosine phosphorylation, Tyrosine kinase, Signal transduction, Modification of protein, cGAS-STING, Review


核酸免疫识别属于天然免疫,存在于几乎所有类型的细胞中并在进化上高度保守1。作为机体免疫系统的第一道防线,核酸免疫识别通路主要负责监视和抵御外源病原微生物的入侵。在机制上,宿主细胞的核酸识别受体能够识别来自病原微生物所特有的异源DNA或RNA2,同时也能感知并应答异常暴露在胞质中的自身DNA3-5,通过多级信号转导,诱导众多促炎性细胞因子和趋化因子的转录和表达,以达到清除病原体、激活适应性免疫并响应机体损伤的目的。值得注意的是,核酸识别信号的过度活化与一系列免疫炎症和自身免疫疾病密切相关6-10。因此,核酸免疫识别信号通路在分子水平受到严格且精密的调控。

翻译后修饰是生物体内一类重要且广泛的调控机制,参与调控几乎所有的细胞生命活动11。其中,蛋白质磷酸化和去磷酸化是最常见的翻译后修饰形式,分别由蛋白激酶和蛋白磷酸酶介导,根据修饰的氨基酸残基种类又可分为丝/苏氨酸磷酸化和酪氨酸磷酸化。核酸免疫识别的丝/苏氨酸磷酸化调控一直是领域内的研究热点12。近年来越来越多的研究表明,酪氨酸磷酸化修饰同样参与核酸免疫识别的调控,并在多种生理病理情况下发挥重要功能。本文将简要介绍核酸免疫识别的信号分子机制和生理病理功能以及酪氨酸激酶和磷酸酶,重点阐述核酸识别信号的酪氨酸磷酸化修饰调控,并深入讨论这一重要调控机制在抗肿瘤免疫中的应用和未来展望。

1. 核酸天然免疫识别的分子机制和生物学功能

1.1. 核酸天然免疫识别信号的分子机制

目前已知的核酸识别信号主要包括RIG-I样受体-MAVS通路、cGAS-STING通路、Toll样受体-MyD88和Toll样受体-TRIF通路转导的基因表达调控,以及黑色素瘤缺失因子2介导的炎症小体激活等。其中,RIG-I样受体家族蛋白介导的RNA免疫识别和抗病毒宿主防御是宿主识别并抵御RNA病毒的主要机制13。RIG-I样受体家族蛋白属于RNA解旋酶家族,包括三个成员:RIG-I14、MDA515和LGP216。在识别并结合异源RNA分子后,RIG-I样受体家族蛋白发生多聚化,导致其氨基端的CARD结构域相互靠近并聚集17-18,并促进同样在氨基端包含CARD结构域的接头蛋白MAVS在线粒体上聚集成朊蛋白样纤维结构19-22。生化实验和遗传学证据都表明,MAVS具有与朊蛋白类似的生物学特征,其中最显著的特点就是具备自我延续的能力。这意味着当少量MAVS受到RIG-I和MDA5的诱导而组装成一个小聚集体后,这个小聚集体可以迅速招募并激活更多MAVS,形成一个庞大的聚集体,从而高效快速地激活抗病毒免疫应答23。有意思的是,线粒体的动态融合和分裂也参与调控MAVS信号的活化水平24。随后,寡聚化的MAVS作为信号平台招募并激活核酸免疫识别信号通路中的关键激酶TBK1和IKKε。激活后的TBK1会磷酸化MAVS羧基端一个特定基序pLxIS上的丝氨酸,这一特定基序的磷酸化被认为是招募转录因子IRF3到MAVS-TBK1信号复合体中所必需的25。值得注意的是,此基序不仅存在于MAVS上,也同样存在于STING和TRIF中,其功能均负责招募IRF3。随着MAVS-TBK1-IRF3复合体的形成,TBK1磷酸化IRF3羧基末端一系列丝氨酸和苏氨酸,促使IRF3从信号复合体上解离并形成同源二聚体,随后进入细胞核并启动Ⅰ型干扰素的转录和表达(图1)。

图1. 核酸免疫识别细胞信号转导示意图.

图1

细胞质核酸的来源主要包括入侵宿主的细菌或病毒自身的RNA或DNA、细胞微核中的DNA,以及线粒体或基因组因损伤而泄露到胞质内的DNA. 其中,胞质RNA被受体RIG-I或MDA5识别,并通过定位在线粒体上的MAVS,激活IKK复合体和激酶TBK1,进而分别活化下游的转录因子NF-κB和IRF3,最终诱导促炎性细胞因子和Ⅰ型干扰素的转录和表达. 胞质DNA则被cGAS识别并诱导cGAS合成cGAMP,cGAMP随即作为第二信使激活定位在内质网上的STING蛋白,进而同样激活IKK复合体和TBK1. 此外,AIM2也能识别胞质DNA,并与caspase-1前体和ASC形成炎症小体,最终促进caspase-1成熟并切割IL-1β和IL-18前体,成熟的IL-1β和IL-18导致炎症的发生. RIG-I:视黄酸诱导基因蛋白;MDA:黑色素瘤分化因子;MAVS:线粒体抗病毒信号蛋白;IKK:核因子κB抑制激酶;TBK:TANK结合激酶;NF-κB:核因子κB;IRF:干扰素调节因子;cGAS:环鸟苷酸-腺苷酸合成酶;cGAMP:环鸟苷酸-腺苷酸;STING:干扰素基因刺激分子;AIM:黑色素瘤缺失因子;caspase:胱天蛋白酶;ASC:凋亡相关包含CARD的微粒样蛋白;IκB:核因子κB抑制蛋白;P:磷酸化.

细胞质DNA免疫识别信号同样起始于胞质内的DNA识别受体感知异常出现在胞质内的异源DNA或自身DNA。当前已鉴定出多个胞质DNA识别受体,包括AIM226、γ干扰素诱导蛋白1627、Z型DNA结合蛋白128、DDX41以及cGAS29。其中,cGAS是当前领域内认为表达最普遍、功能最重要的DNA识别受体。cGAS结合DNA并不依赖于DNA序列的特征30-32,因此不仅能识别来自单纯疱疹病毒、牛痘病毒、人免疫缺陷病毒等多种DNA病毒或逆转录病毒的异源核酸33,也能感知因细胞损伤、压力或恶化而泄露到胞质内的自身核DNA或线粒体DNA3-5。在结合双链DNA后,cGAS构象发生明显改变,促进核苷酸转移酶活性的释放,从而合成2´3´-cGAMP30-31。随后,cGAMP作为第二信使结合并激活定位于内质网上的接头蛋白STING34。STING的氨基端包含四个跨膜结构域,使其在静息状态下以同源二聚体形式定位在内质网膜上,而其羧基端面向细胞质,包括cGAMP结合结构域和一个羧基端尾巴35-38。冷冻电镜和结构学分析表明,在结合cGAMP后,STING的羧基端结构域会整体发生180°旋转,同时伴随构象改变和寡聚化39。此外,STING寡聚体会以囊泡运输的方式从内质网向其他膜系统转位,包括内质网-高尔基中间体、高尔基体、内涵体、自噬小体以及近核小体等40。在这个过程中,STING通过羧基端尾巴上一段保守基序(PLPLRT/SD)招募TBK1并促进TBK1活化41。与MAVS类似,TBK1会磷酸化STING羧基端尾巴上pLxIS基序的第366位丝氨酸,该位点的磷酸化对招募IRF3形成STING-TBK1-IRF3信号复合体至关重要25。随后,IRF3在STING复合体中被TBK1磷酸化激活,从而二聚化入核启动Ⅰ型干扰素的转录(图1)。值得注意的是,目前领域内对STING寡聚体转运的功能和机制尚不完全清楚,对STING激活下游TBK1/IRF3的时空关系亦存在争议。此外,核酸识别信号的活化也能激活NF-κB介导的促炎信号,但其中详细的分子机制仍不十分清楚。

1.2. 核酸天然免疫识别的生理病理功能

1.2.1. 决定细胞命运

核酸免疫识别是一类在进化上高度保守的免疫应答机制。与Toll样受体介导的天然免疫识别机制不同,核酸免疫识别通路存在于几乎所有类型的细胞中。核酸天然免疫能识别外源病原体的核酸,近年研究还发现,cGAS-STING介导的DNA免疫识别能感知因细胞压力或细胞损伤而泄漏到胞质中的染色质DNA或线粒体DNA3-5,因此在多种生理病理过程中发挥重要作用42。在细胞水平,核酸免疫识别参与调控细胞凋亡43-44、细胞坏死45和细胞衰老46-48,同时也能控制蛋白翻译49,提示核酸免疫识别在细胞命运选择决定中发挥重要功能。值得注意的是,STING活化能够诱导细胞自噬,且相比STING诱导Ⅰ型干扰素在进化上更加保守和古老50

1.2.2. 介导自身免疫和炎症疾病

核酸免疫识别信号活化的重要标志之一是生成Ⅰ型干扰素和成百上千种干扰素诱导基因。值得注意的是,该特征同样存在于多种自身免疫疾病中51-52。近年来一些关键研究成果表明,核酸免疫识别的过度活化与Aicardi-Goutières综合征53-56、系统性红斑狼疮52、脊椎软骨发育不良57等自身免疫疾病的发生发展密切相关。以Aicardi-Goutières综合征为例,这类遗传性疾病的主要症状为小头畸形、智力迟钝及童年死亡。当前研究认为,一些参与核酸代谢的基因,如Trex1Rnaseh2aRnaseh2bSamhd1等隐性突变导致的干扰素信号异常活化是Aicardi-Goutières综合征发病的主要诱因53-56Trex1基因编码的核酸外切酶可以切割因细胞损伤而产生的核酸片段。研究发现,Trex1基因敲除小鼠具有与Aicardi-Goutières综合征患者相似的慢性炎症表现,在Trex1敲除小鼠的组织内能检测到过量的cGAMP55。若在此基础上再敲除CgasSting,则均能显著缓解炎症的发生发展,提示cGAS-STING介导的DNA免疫识别应答机制是Trex1基因缺失小鼠表现出Aicardi-Goutières综合征的主要分子机制55。SAVI是一类较为罕见但十分严重的自身免疫疾病,其主要表型包括新生儿全身性炎症反应、肺间质病变以及广泛分布在骶骨区(如手指、脚趾、耳朵和鼻)的皮肤血管病变58。由于患者STING1基因存在点突变,因此命名为SAVI。后续研究发现,这类STING1突变均为功能获得性点突变,变异的STING蛋白在不需要配体cGAMP结合的情况下即可直接活化并激活下游信号59。目前已在SAVI中鉴定出的STING持续性激活突变体包括V147M、V147L、N154S、V155M、C206Y、R281Q、R284G和R284S等60。此外,核酸免疫识别与多种器官的纤维化61-63、心肌梗死64以及多种神经退行性疾病65-67的发生发展密切相关,其分子机制也与STING介导的Ⅰ型干扰素和促炎信号均相关。

1.2.3. 控制肿瘤发生并影响肿瘤免疫

核酸免疫识别在免疫监视和抗肿瘤免疫中扮演着重要角色。DNA损伤及其诱导的基因组不稳定是肿瘤的一个重要特征68。当受损的DNA泄漏到细胞质,会被胞质DNA受体cGAS感知并激活DNA免疫识别信号,一方面通过直接促进细胞凋亡或衰老来抑制肿瘤发展47-48,另一方面通过释放促炎性细胞因子招募巨噬细胞等免疫细胞对癌细胞进行免疫清除69-70。在小鼠肿瘤移植模型中,STING激动剂可以显著促进肿瘤特异性抗原提呈,并抑制肿瘤生长。同时,STING激动剂的联合应用可以显著增强化疗或免疫疗法(如PD-1)的疗效71-74。因此,开发基于STING激动剂的免疫佐剂并应用于临床抗肿瘤治疗是当前领域内的热点和重点之一。然而,也有文章报道,cGAS能通过抑制DNA损伤修复的过程来促进肿瘤的发生75;STING激活的非经典NF-κB信号能驱动乳腺癌和肺癌的转移76,表明cGAS-STING信号与肿瘤的发生发展之间存在着复杂而紧密的信号网络。相反地,为了逃避核酸识别介导的免疫监视,肿瘤细胞采用多种策略来抑制核酸免疫识别通路的活化。大多数肿瘤细胞通过在转录水平或翻译水平下调核酸识别关键蛋白cGAS或STING的表达29,直接阻断信号活化。

2. 核酸识别信号的酪氨酸磷酸化修饰调控

2.1. 人酪氨酸激酶和酪氨酸磷酸酶蛋白家族

人类全基因组测序发现,在当前20 000~25 000个已知编码基因中,超过500个基因编码蛋白激酶,超过250个基因编码蛋白磷酸酶77。根据磷酸化修饰的氨基酸残基种类,可以将这些蛋白分为酪氨酸激酶/磷酸酶和丝/苏氨酸激酶/磷酸酶。值得注意的是,有一部分激酶和磷酸酶,特别是磷酸酶,可以同时参与丝/苏氨酸和酪氨酸的磷酸化调控,展示出机体内酪氨酸磷酸化过程的多样性和复杂性。

在人类基因组中,现已鉴定出90个酪氨酸激酶,其中包括58个跨膜的受体酪氨酸激酶,分为20个亚家族;以及32个定位在细胞质胞浆中的非受体酪氨酸激酶,分为10个亚家族78。在功能上,酪氨酸激酶是原癌基因的重要组成部分,并且在结构上具有高度同源性。酪氨酸激酶主要参与调控细胞间通信和机体发育,且仅存在于多细胞生物中。虽然酪氨酸激酶仅占所有基因总数的0.3%左右,但因其体细胞突变而导致的肿瘤却是肿瘤发生的重要成因,提示酪氨酸激酶在调控机体正常发育和肿瘤发生发展中扮演双重角色78。在机制上,传统理论认为酪氨酸激酶,特别是受体酪氨酸激酶,主要参与细胞生长、增殖和存活相关的信号转导,因此这些信号的异常活化均促使细胞突破生长抑制并最终发生癌变79。因此,针对酪氨酸激酶的激动剂或抑制剂一直都是生物医药领域的研发热点。

当前在人类基因组中已鉴定出的酪氨酸磷酸酶共有104个,根据其磷酸酶活性结构域的保守性分为class Ⅰ、class Ⅱ、class Ⅲ三个家族。其中,class Ⅰ家族包含100个酪氨酸磷酸酶,又可分为仅具有酪氨酸磷酸酶活性亚家族(37个)和同时具有丝/苏氨酸和酪氨酸磷酸酶活性亚家族(63个)80。结构和进化生物学分析发现,class Ⅰ酪氨酸磷酸酶在进化上可能均起源于同一个磷酸酶81。class Ⅱ家族仅有一个成员,即LMPTP。根据结构分析预测,该蛋白可能起源于细菌的砷酸还原酶,因此比class Ⅰ家族的磷酸酶更加古老82。class Ⅲ家族包含CDC25家族的3个酪氨酸磷酸酶,其可能是由细菌的类硫氰酸酶进化而来81。在功能上,酪氨酸磷酸酶与酪氨酸激酶协同控制底物的酪氨酸磷酸化动态平衡,因而在细胞信号转导,细胞增殖、分化、凋亡,以及肿瘤发生发展中同样发挥着重要作用。

2.2. 酪氨酸磷酸化促进cGAS活化

cGAS在细胞内通过动态的核质穿梭方式广泛分布于细胞质和细胞核中,这一现象对cGAS起始免疫应答和维持细胞稳态至关重要。研究发现,DNA损伤可以促使cGAS从细胞质向核内转移,而B淋巴酪氨酸激酶介导的cGAS第215位酪氨酸残基磷酸化使cGAS维持胞内分布75。酪氨酸激酶Syk可以磷酸化cGAS的Y214和Y215两个相邻的酪氨酸残基,这对cGAS的酶活性和DNA免疫识别信号活化十分关键83。抑制Syk活性可明显导致cGAMP合成减少以及干扰素诱导基因的下调。此外,Src激酶也能磷酸化cGAS的第248位酪氨酸,从而抑制cGAS的酶活性及其与DNA的结合能力84。因此,这一机制也被认为是原癌基因Src在肿瘤发生早期逃避天然免疫监视的一种重要手段。然而,上述cGAS酪氨酸磷酸化位点的去磷酸化机制和相关磷酸酶尚不明确(图2A)。

图2. 核酸免疫识别机制中的关键蛋白cGAS、STING、TBK1、MAVS和IRF3的酪氨酸磷酸化修饰示意图.

图2

A:cGAS受酪氨酸激酶Syk、Blk和Src的磷酸化修饰;B:STING受酪氨酸激酶Syk、Csk、EGFR和Src的磷酸化修饰和酪氨酸磷酸酶SHP-1和PTPN1/2的去磷酸化修饰;C:TBK1受酪氨酸激酶Src、Lck、Hck和Fgr的磷酸化修饰;D:MAVS受酪氨酸激酶c-Abl的磷酸化修饰;E:IRF3受酪氨酸激酶c-Abl和Arg的磷酸化修饰. cGAS:环鸟苷酸-腺苷酸合成酶;Syk:脾酪氨酸激酶;Blk:B淋巴细胞激酶;Src:劳氏肉瘤病毒癌基因同源激酶;STING:干扰素基因刺激因子;Csk:羧基端c-Src激酶;EGFR:表皮生长因子受体;SHP:Src同源区2蛋白酪氨酸磷酸酶;PTPN:非受体酪氨酸磷酸酶;TBK:TANK结合激酶;Lck:淋巴细胞特异性激酶;Hck:造血细胞激酶;Fgr:Gardner-Rasheed 猫肉瘤病毒癌基因同源激酶;MAVS:线粒体抗病毒信号蛋白;CARD:半胱天冬酶激活与招募结构域;c-Abl:Abelson鼠白血病病毒基因同源激酶;IRF:干扰素调节因子;Arg:Abelson相关激酶.

2.3. STING受到复杂的酪氨酸磷酸化和去磷酸化调控

近年来,STING及其介导的DNA免疫识别因具有广泛的生物学功能而成为领域的研究热点。其中,关于STING的酪氨酸磷酸化修饰调控也有较多的研究,当前主要集中在STING的Y240和Y245这两个非常保守的酪氨酸位点上。舒红兵教授团队的两项工作先后报道了Src激酶酪氨酸对STING的Y245位点,以及Csk激酶对Y240和Y245两个位点的磷酸化修饰并详细阐述了其对STING完全活化的重要调控作用85-86。相反,酪氨酸磷酸酶PTPN1/2介导的STING Y245位点去磷酸化则能通过促进STING被20S蛋白酶体系统降解,从而终止DNA免疫识别信号87。Ganes C. SEN教授实验室同样证实了STING的Y240和Y245位点磷酸化对STING完全活化的必要性,但介导这两个位点磷酸化的激酶分别是Syk和EGFR88-89。研究发现,Y245位酪氨酸磷酸化会促使STING向内体转位,这一过程对STING招募IRF3形成有功能的信号复合体是必需的;相反,如果阻断该位点磷酸化,STING则更倾向于被运输至自噬体并降解88。另外,Syk介导的Y240位磷酸化早于Y245位磷酸化,因此被认为对STING信号的起始十分重要89。有意思的是,病毒同样可以利用调控STING的酪氨酸磷酸化修饰来逃避免疫应答。例如,人免疫缺陷病毒在感染宿主时,其释放的辅助蛋白病毒感染因子通过招募磷酸酶SHP-1促进STING第162位酪氨酸的去磷酸化,进而减弱STING活化所必需的K63型泛素化修饰,最终抑制Ⅰ型干扰素的合成,有助于病毒免疫逃逸90,这一发现也为临床抑制人类免疫缺陷病毒和治疗艾滋病提供了新的策略(图2B)。

2.4. TBK1的酪氨酸磷酸化主要受Src激酶家族调控

TBK1作为核酸免疫识别信号的关键激酶,在RNA免疫识别和DNA免疫识别过程中均发挥核心功能,因此对其活性的调控具有重要意义。本团队早先研究发现,在病毒感染过程中,TBK1的酪氨酸磷酸化状态会发生动态变化:静息状态下,TBK1的酪氨酸磷酸化水平较高;在病毒感染初期,其酪氨酸磷酸化水平显著下降;而在病毒感染后期,酪氨酸磷酸化水平又会恢复到高水平91。有趣的是,病毒感染或核酸类似物刺激能特异性诱导Src非受体酪氨酸激酶家族成员Lck、Hck和Fgr的mRNA转录和蛋白表达水平上升,而同时敲除Lck/Hck/Fgr能显著增强核酸识别信号91。质谱和生化分析结果表明,Lck/Hck/Fgr能直接磷酸化TBK1的Y354和Y394两个酪氨酸残基,并导致TBK1活性被完全抑制。在细胞和动物水平,使用Lck抑制剂可以显著增强细胞和小鼠的抗病毒免疫应答并抑制病毒的复制,并延长小鼠的存活时间91。类似地,有研究报道Src家族酪氨酸激酶活性抑制剂塞卡替尼(Saracatinib)或达沙替尼(Dasatinib)可以抑制登革热病毒的复制和扩增,这一过程依赖于Fyn激酶,但更深入的机制尚不明确92。然而,也有其他研究表明在巨噬细胞中,Src激酶可以磷酸化TBK1的Y179位点,该位点磷酸化促进TBK1活性中心S172位点磷酸化和TBK1的活性,以及下游Ⅰ型干扰素信号93。以上结果提示,Src及其家族其他成员对TBK1活性的调控可能存在细胞或生理特异性。然而,关于介导上述酪氨酸残基去磷酸化的磷酸酶尚未被鉴定,以及TBK1是否还有其他位点的酪氨酸存在磷酸化和去磷酸化修饰也需要进一步研究(图2C)。

2.5. 其他核酸识别信号的酪氨酸磷酸化修饰调控

核酸免疫识别信号通路的其他核心成员蛋白也受酪氨酸磷酸化修饰的调控。MAVS蛋白第9位酪氨酸残基的磷酸化最早在2012年被发现对Ⅰ型干扰素信号的活化是必需的,但当时并未鉴定介导这一位点磷酸化的酪氨酸激酶94。2017年,Cheng等95发现,酪氨酸激酶c-Abl能磷酸化包括Y9在内的MAVS上多个酪氨酸残基。有趣的是,MAVS信号活化能同时诱导细胞自噬的发生,而且这一过程依赖于MAVS氨基端一个保守的LC3结合区域Y(9)xxI(12);相反,c-Abl介导的Y9位磷酸化则抑制MAVS与LC3的结合,从而增强MAVS起始的抗病毒免疫应答95图2D)。此外,c-Abl和c-Abl相关激酶Arg也能使转录因子IRF3的Y292位点磷酸化,而该位点的磷酸化修饰对于IRF3诱导Ⅰ型干扰素基因的转录非常重要96图2E)。

除RLR-MAVS和cGAS-STING外,其他核酸识别信号通路也受到酪氨酸磷酸化的调控。在树突状细胞和人髓系白血病单核细胞中,DDX41不仅可以直接结合病毒DNA分子并激活STING,也能通过识别来自细菌的环二鸟苷和环二腺苷来诱导Ⅰ型干扰素的合成97。研究发现,DDX41的Y364和Y414位点磷酸化促进其识别AT富集的双链DNA片段并增强与STING的相互作用,其中Y414位磷酸化由酪氨酸激酶BTK所诱导。因此,BTK在DDX41介导的免疫应答中起关键正调控作用98。AIM2主要在免疫细胞中通过识别异源双链DNA分子促进炎症小体的组装,从而激活炎症反应。AIM2炎症小体中的关键接头蛋白ASC的第144位酪氨酸在炎症小体激活过程中被酪氨酸激酶Syk和Jnk磷酸化,这对炎症小体下游蛋白酶caspase-1的活化至关重要99图3)。

图3. 核酸免疫识别信号通路中的关键酪氨酸磷酸化修饰调控示意图.

图3

核酸免疫识别信号网络在多个层面被各种酪氨酸激酶和酪氨酸磷酸酶调控。其中,激酶c-Abl促进MAVS和IRF3的活性;激酶Src促进TBK1和STING的活性,但却抑制cGAS的酶活性;激酶Syk能促进cGAS、AIM2和STING的激活. 此外,激酶Csk和EGFR也能促进STING活化,而磷酸酶SHP-1和PTPN1/2通过去磷酸化STING抑制其活性. Jnk:Jun氨基端激酶;cGAS:环鸟苷酸-腺苷酸合成酶;Syk:脾酪氨酸激酶;Blk:B淋巴细胞激酶;Src:劳氏肉瘤病毒癌基因同源激酶;STING:干扰素基因刺激因子;Csk:羧基端c-Src激酶;EGFR:表皮生长因子受体;SHP:Src同源区2蛋白酪氨酸磷酸酶;PTPN:非受体酪氨酸磷酸酶;TBK:TANK结合激酶;Lck:淋巴细胞特异性激酶;Hck:造血细胞激酶;Fgr:Gardner-Rasheed 猫肉瘤病毒癌基因同源激酶;MAVS:线粒体抗病毒信号蛋白;c-Abl:Abelson鼠白血病病毒基因同源激酶;IRF:干扰素调节因子;Arg:Abelson相关激酶;RIG-I:视黄酸诱导基因蛋白;MDA:黑色素瘤分化因子;AIM:黑色素瘤缺失因子;ASC:凋亡相关包含CARD的微粒样蛋白;cGAMP:环鸟苷酸-腺苷酸.

3. 结语

尽管传统观点认为酪氨酸激酶所介导的细胞生长、增殖、抗凋亡信号的异常活化是导致细胞恶化并最终发展成癌症的主要因素。然而,越来越多的证据表明,异常活化的酪氨酸激酶也可以通过调控如核酸天然免疫等其他信号网络来逃避免疫监视,从而间接促进肿瘤的发生和发展。除上述提到的Src激酶诱导cGAS酪氨酸磷酸化并抑制其活性的机制外84,本团队早先研究还发现,配体非依赖的原癌基因HER2能显著抑制cGAS-STING信号,并有助于HER2阳性的乳腺癌、前列腺癌和卵巢癌等癌细胞实现免疫逃逸100。尽管这一机制并不直接通过HER2与核酸识别信号的互作,而是依赖于HER2下游丝/苏氨酸激酶Akt1对TBK1的S510位点磷酸化,但使用HER2抑制剂能显著增强宿主核酸免疫识别介导的抗肿瘤免疫应答100。这些调控机制的发现提示酪氨酸激酶异常活化与核酸免疫识别在肿瘤细胞中功能丧失密切相关,且这种机制可能广泛存在于各类肿瘤细胞中。因此,利用生物化学、分子生物学、肿瘤生物学等研究手段,结合基因组学和蛋白组学的大规模筛选和预测,鉴定并解析酪氨酸激酶与核酸天然免疫信号的互作在不同肿瘤中的功能及机制是需要重点关注和研究的方向。相关调控机制的解析将为肿瘤检测、诊断和治疗提供精准技术支持。例如,基于酪氨酸激酶修饰底物位点制备的磷酸化单克隆抗体可能成为临床肿瘤分类和分级的重要工具;在肿瘤治疗方面,联合使用靶向激酶的抑制剂和激活天然免疫信号的激动剂有望提供高效且特异的治疗策略。

迄今,领域内对核酸免疫识别的理解和认知早已突破其固有的宿主抗病毒防御能力。基于核酸免疫识别在多种生理病理中的重要生物学功能,细胞或组织类型特异性的、多样化的调控机制也逐渐被认识。本文总结了核酸免疫识别的酪氨酸磷酸化调控机制和功能,并讨论了这些机制在抗肿瘤免疫中的潜在应用。需要注意的是,虽然这些重要的酪氨酸磷酸化调控中关键蛋白的酪氨酸修饰位点和激酶均已被鉴定,但调控这些位点去磷酸化的磷酸酶至今仍极少报道。因此,相应磷酸酶的鉴定对全面且动态地理解酪氨酸磷酸化修饰调控的功能至关重要。此外,目前核酸免疫识别的酪氨酸磷酸化调控的生物学意义仍局限于细胞水平,未来需要深入探讨这些调控在动物生理和病理条件下的功能,并以此为基础开发全新的技术手段,为临床治疗相关疾病提供重要策略。

Acknowledgments

研究得到国家自然科学基金(82001746,31830052)、浙江省自然科学基金(LY24C080001)支持

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82001746, 31830052) and Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province (LY24C080001)

[缩略语]

视黄酸诱导基因蛋白(retinoic acid-inducible gene I,RIG-I);线粒体抗病毒信号蛋白(mitochondrial antiviral signaling,MAVS);环鸟苷酸-腺苷酸合成酶(cyclic guanosine monophosphate-adenosine monophosphate synthase,cGAS);干扰素基因刺激因子(stimulator of interferon genes,STING);诱导β干扰素的含TIR结构域的接头蛋白(TIR domain-containing adapter protein inducing IFN-beta,TRIF);黑色素瘤分化因子(melanoma differentiation factor,MDA);遗传和生理学实验室基因蛋白(laboratory of genetics and physiology,LGP);胱天蛋白酶(cysteine aspartic acid specific protease,caspase);caspase激活与招募结构域(caspase activation and recruitment domain,CARD);TANK结合激酶(TANK binding kinase,TBK);核因子κB抑制激酶(inhibitor of nuclear factor kappa-B kinase,ΙΚΚ);干扰素调节因子(interferon regulatory factor,IRF);黑色素瘤缺失因子(absent in melanoma,AIM);DEAD/H-box解旋酶(DEAD/H-box helicase,DDX);环鸟苷酸-腺苷酸(cyclic guanosine monophosphate-adenosine monophosphate,cGAMP);核因子κB(nuclear factor κB,NF-κB);三素修复核酸外切酶(three prime repair exonuclease,TREX);STING相关婴儿血管病(STING-associated vasculopathy with onset in infancy,SAVI);脾酪氨酸激酶(spleen tyrosine kinase,Syk);羧基端c-Src激酶(C-terminal regulatory tyrosine,Csk);非受体蛋白酪氨酸磷酸酶(protein tyrosine phosphatase non-receptor,PTPN);表皮生长因子受体(epidermal growth factor receptor,EGFR);Src同源区2蛋白酪氨酸磷酸酶(SH2-containing protein tyrosine phosphatase,SHP);淋巴细胞特异性激酶(lymphocyte-specific protein tyrosine kinase,Lck);造血细胞激酶(hemopoietic cell kinase,Hck);Gardner-Rasheed 猫肉瘤病毒癌基因同源激酶(Gardner-Rasheed feline sarcoma viral oncogene homolog,Fgr);Abelson鼠白血病病毒基因同源激酶(cellular Abelson gene,c-Abl);Abelson相关激酶(Abelson related gene,Arg);布鲁顿酪氨酸激酶(Bruton’s tyrosine kinase,BTK);人表皮生长因子受体(human epidermal growth factor receptor,HER)

利益冲突声明

所有作者均声明不存在利益冲突

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests

参考文献(References)

  • 1.HOPFNER K P, HORNUNG V. Molecular mechanisms and cellular functions of cGAS-STING signalling[J]. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol, 2020, 21(9): 501-521. 10.1038/s41580-020-0244-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.AKIRA S, UEMATSU S, TAKEUCHI O. Pathogen recognition and innate immunity[J]. Cell, 2006, 124(4): 783-801. 10.1016/j.cell.2006.02.015 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.MACKENZIE K J, CARROLL P, MARTIN C A, et al. cGAS surveillance of micronuclei links genome instability to innate immunity[J]. Nature, 2017, 548(7668): 461-465. 10.1038/nature23449 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.WHITE M J, MCARTHUR K, METCALF D, et al. Apoptotic caspases suppress mtDNA-induced STING-mediated type Ⅰ IFN production[J]. Cell, 2014, 159(7): 1549-1562. 10.1016/j.cell.2014.11.036 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.RONGVAUX A, JACKSON R, HARMAN C C, et al. Apoptotic caspases prevent the induction of type Ⅰ interferons by mitochondrial DNA[J]. Cell, 2014, 159(7): 1563-1577. 10.1016/j.cell.2014.11.037 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.AHN J, RUIZ P, BARBER G N. Intrinsic self-DNA triggers inflammatory disease dependent on STING[J]. J Immunol, 2014, 193(9): 4634-4642. 10.4049/jimmunol.1401337 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.DOBBS N, BURNAEVSKIY N, CHEN D, et al. STING activation by translocation from the ER is asso-ciated with infection and autoinflammatory disease[J]. Cell Host Microbe, 2015, 18(2): 157-168. 10.1016/j.chom.2015.07.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.GAO D, LI T, LI X D, et al. Activation of cyclic GMP-AMP synthase by self-DNA causes autoimmune diseases[J/OL]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2015, 112(42): E5699-E5705. 10.1073/pnas.1516465112 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.GRAY E E, TREUTING P M, WOODWARD J J, et al. Cutting edge: cGAS is required for lethal autoim-mune disease in the Trex1-deficient mouse model of Aicardi-Goutières syndrome[J]. J Immunol, 2015, 195(5): 1939-1943. 10.4049/jimmunol.1500969 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.KATO H, FUJITA T. RIG-I-like receptors and autoim-mune diseases[J]. Curr Opin Immunol, 2015, 37: 40-45. 10.1016/j.coi.2015.10.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.LIU J, QIAN C, CAO X. Post-translational modification control of innate immunity[J]. Immunity, 2016, 45(1): 15-30. 10.1016/j.immuni.2016.06.020 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.DENG Y, WANG Y, LI L, et al. Post-translational modifications of proteins in cytosolic nucleic acid sensing signaling pathways[J]. Front Immunol, 2022, 13: 898724. 10.3389/fimmu.2022.898724 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.LOO Y M, GALE M J R. Immune signaling by RIG-I-like receptors[J]. Immunity, 2011, 34(5): 680-692. 10.1016/j.immuni.2011.05.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.YONEYAMA M, KIKUCHI M, NATSUKAWA T, et al. The RNA helicase RIG-I has an essential function in double-stranded RNA-induced innate antiviral responses[J]. Nat Immunol, 2004, 5(7): 730-737. 10.1038/ni1087 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.KANG D C, GOPALKRISHNAN R V, WU Q, et al. mda-5: an interferon-inducible putative RNA helicase with double-stranded RNA-dependent ATPase activity and melanoma growth-suppressive properties[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2002, 99(2): 637-642. 10.1073/pnas.022637199 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.SAITO T, HIRAI R, LOO Y M, et al. Regulation of innate antiviral defenses through a shared repressor domain in RIG-I and LGP2[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2007, 104(2): 582-587. 10.1073/pnas.0606699104 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.LU C, XU H, RANJITH-KUMAR C T, et al. The structural basis of 5' triphosphate double-stranded RNA recognition by RIG-I C-terminal domain[J]. Structure, 2010, 18(8): 1032-1043. 10.1016/j.str.2010.05.007 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.KOWALINSKI E, LUNARDI T, MCCARTHY A A, et al. Structural basis for the activation of innate immune pattern-recognition receptor RIG-I by viral RNA[J]. Cell, 2011, 147(2): 423-435. 10.1016/j.cell.2011.09.039 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.KAWAI T, TAKAHASHI K, SATO S, et al. IPS-1, an adaptor triggering RIG-I- and Mda5-mediated type Ⅰ interferon induction[J]. Nat Immunol, 2005, 6(10): 981-988. 10.1038/ni1243 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.MEYLAN E, CURRAN J, HOFMANN K, et al. Cardif is an adaptor protein in the RIG-I antiviral pathway and is targeted by hepatitis C virus[J]. Nature, 2005, 437(7062): 1167-1172. 10.1038/nature04193 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.SETH R B, SUN L, EA C K, et al. Identification and characterization of MAVS, a mitochondrial antiviral signaling protein that activates NF-kappaB and IRF 3[J]. Cell, 2005, 122(5): 669-682. 10.1016/j.cell.2005.08.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.XU L G, WANG Y Y, HAN K J, et al. VISA is an adapter protein required for virus-triggered IFN-beta signaling[J]. Mol Cell, 2005, 19(6): 727-740. 10.1016/j.molcel.2005.08.014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.HOU F, SUN L, ZHENG H, et al. MAVS forms functional prion-like aggregates to activate and propagate antiviral innate immune response[J]. Cell, 2011, 146(3): 448-461. 10.1016/j.cell.2011.06.041 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.CHEN S, LIU S, WANG J, et al. TBK1-mediated DRP1 targeting confers nucleic acid sensing to reprogram mitochondrial dynamics and physiology[J]. Mol Cell, 2020, 80(5): 810-827.e7. 10.1016/j.molcel.2020.10.018 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.LIU S, CAI X, WU J, et al. Phosphorylation of innate immune adaptor proteins MAVS, STING, and TRIF induces IRF3 activation[J]. Science, 2015, 347(6227): aaa2630. 10.1126/science.aaa2630 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.RATHINAM V A, JIANG Z, WAGGONER S N, et al. The AIM2 inflammasome is essential for host defense against cytosolic bacteria and DNA viruses[J]. Nat Immunol, 2010, 11(5): 395-402. 10.1038/ni.1864 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.UNTERHOLZNER L, KEATING S E, BARAN M, et al. IFI16 is an innate immune sensor for intracellular DNA[J]. Nat Immunol, 2010, 11(11): 997-1004. 10.1038/ni.1932 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.TAKAOKA A, WANG Z, CHOI M K, et al. DAI (DLM-1/ZBP1) is a cytosolic DNA sensor and an activator of innate immune response[J]. Nature, 2007, 448(7152): 501-505. 10.1038/nature06013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.SUN L, WU J, DU F, et al. Cyclic GMP-AMP synthase is a cytosolic DNA sensor that activates the type Ⅰ interferon pathway[J]. Science, 2013, 339(6121): 786-791. 10.1126/science.1232458 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.ZHANG X, WU J, DU F, et al. The cytosolic DNA sensor cGAS forms an oligomeric complex with DNA and undergoes switch-like conformational changes in the activation loop[J]. Cell Rep, 2014, 6(3): 421-430. 10.1016/j.celrep.2014.01.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.ZHOU W, WHITELEY A T, DE OLIVEIRA MANN C C, et al. Structure of the human cGAS-DNA complex reveals enhanced control of immune surveillance[J]. Cell, 2018, 174(2): 300-311.e11. 10.1016/j.cell.2018.06.026 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.XIE W, LAMA L, ADURA C, et al. Human cGAS catalytic domain has an additional DNA-binding interface that enhances enzymatic activity and liquid-phase condensation[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2019, 116(24): 11946-11955. 10.1073/pnas.1905013116 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.GAO D, WU J, WU Y T, et al. Cyclic GMP-AMP synthase is an innate immune sensor of HIV and other retroviruses[J]. Science, 2013, 341(6148): 903-906. 10.1126/science.1240933 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.WU J, SUN L, CHEN X, et al. Cyclic GMP-AMP is an endogenous second messenger in innate immune signaling by cytosolic DNA[J]. Science, 2013, 339(6121): 826-830. 10.1126/science.1229963 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.ISHIKAWA H, BARBER G N. STING is an endo-plasmic reticulum adaptor that facilitates innate immune signalling[J]. Nature, 2008, 455(7213): 674-678. 10.1038/nature07317 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.JIN L, WATERMAN P M, JONSCHER K R, et al. MPYS, a novel membrane tetraspanner, is associated with major histocompatibility complex class Ⅱ and mediates transduction of apoptotic signals[J]. Mol Cell Biol, 2008, 28(16): 5014-5026. 10.1128/mcb.00640-08 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.ZHONG B, YANG Y, LI S, et al. The adaptor protein MITA links virus-sensing receptors to IRF3 transcription factor activation[J]. Immunity, 2008, 29(4): 538-550. 10.1016/j.immuni.2008.09.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.SUN W, LI Y, CHEN L, et al. ERIS, an endoplasmic reticulum IFN stimulator, activates innate immune signaling through dimerization[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2009, 106(21): 8653-8658. 10.1073/pnas.0900850106 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.SHANG G, ZHANG C, CHEN Z J, et al. Cryo-EM structures of STING reveal its mechanism of activation by cyclic GMP-AMP[J]. Nature, 2019, 567(7748): 389-393. 10.1038/s41586-019-0998-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.SAITOH T, FUJITA N, HAYASHI T, et al. Atg9a controls dsDNA-driven dynamic translocation of STING and the innate immune response[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2009, 106(49): 20842-20846. 10.1073/pnas.0911267106 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.ZHAO B, DU F, XU P, et al. A conserved PLPLRT/SD motif of STING mediates the recruitment and activation of TBK1[J]. Nature, 2019, 569(7758): 718-722. 10.1038/s41586-019-1228-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.CHEN C, XU P. Cellular functions of cGAS-STING signaling[J]. Trends Cell Biol, 2023, 33(8): 630-648. 10.1016/j.tcb.2022.11.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.PETRASEK J, IRACHETA-VELLVE A, CSAK T, et al. STING-IRF3 pathway links endoplasmic reticulum stress with hepatocyte apoptosis in early alcoholic liver disease[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2013, 110(41): 16544-16549. 10.1073/pnas.1308331110 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.CHATTOPADHYAY S, MARQUES J T, YAMASHITA M, et al. Viral apoptosis is induced by IRF-3-mediated activation of Bax[J]. EMBO J, 2010, 29(10): 1762-1773. 10.1038/emboj.2010.50 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.BRAULT M, OLSEN T M, MARTINEZ J, et al. Intracellular nucleic acid sensing triggers necroptosis through synergistic type Ⅰ IFN and TNF signaling[J]. J Immunol, 2018, 200(8): 2748-2756. 10.4049/jimmunol.1701492 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.YANG H, WANG H, REN J, et al. cGAS is essential for cellular senescence[J/OL]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2017, 114(23): E4612-E4620. 10.1073/pnas.1705499114 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.GLÜCK S, GUEY B, GULEN M F, et al. Innate immune sensing of cytosolic chromatin fragments through cGAS promotes senescence[J]. Nat Cell Biol, 2017, 19(9): 1061-1070. 10.1038/ncb3586 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.DOU Z, GHOSH K, VIZIOLI M G, et al. Cytoplasmic chromatin triggers inflammation in senescence and cancer[J]. Nature, 2017, 550(7676): 402-406. 10.1038/nature24050 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.ZHANG D, LIU Y, ZHU Y, et al. A non-canonical cGAS-STING-PERK pathway facilitates the transla-tional program critical for senescence and organ fibrosis[J]. Nat Cell Biol, 2022, 24(5): 766-782. 10.1038/s41556-022-00894-z [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.GUI X, YANG H, LI T, et al. Autophagy induction via STING trafficking is a primordial function of the cGAS pathway[J]. Nature, 2019, 567(7747): 262-266. 10.1038/s41586-019-1006-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.JUNT T, BARCHET W. Translating nucleic acid-sensing pathways into therapies[J]. Nat Rev Immunol, 2015, 15(9): 529-544. 10.1038/nri3875 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.BANCHEREAU R, HONG S, CANTAREL B, et al. Personalized immunomonitoring uncovers molecular networks that stratify lupus patients[J]. Cell, 2016, 165(3): 551-565. 10.1016/j.cell.2016.03.008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.MACKENZIE K J, CARROLL P, LETTICE L, et al. Ribonuclease H2 mutations induce a cGAS/STING-dependent innate immune response[J]. EMBO J, 2016, 35(8): 831-844. 10.15252/embj.201593339 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.POKATAYEV V, HASIN N, CHON H, et al. RNase H2 catalytic core Aicardi-Goutières syndrome-related mutant invokes cGAS-STING innate immune-sensing pathway in mice[J]. J Exp Med, 2016, 213(3): 329-336. 10.1084/jem.20151464 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.CROW Y J, HAYWARD B E, PARMAR R, et al. Mutations in the gene encoding the 3'-5' DNA exo-nuclease TREX1 cause Aicardi-Goutières syndrome at the AGS1 locus[J]. Nat Genet, 2006, 38(8): 917-920. 10.1038/ng1845 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.CROW Y J, LEITCH A, HAYWARD B E, et al. Mutations in genes encoding ribonuclease H2 subunits cause Aicardi-Goutières syndrome and mimic congenital viral brain infection[J]. Nat Genet, 2006, 38(8): 910-916. 10.1038/ng1842 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.MUNOZ J, MARQUE M, DANDURAND M, et al. Type Ⅰ interferonopathies[J]. Ann Dermatol Venereol, 2015, 142(11): 653-663. 10.1016/j.annder.2015.06.018 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.LIU Y, JESUS A A, MARRERO B, et al. Activated STING in a vascular and pulmonary syndrome[J]. N Engl J Med, 2014, 371(6): 507-518. 10.1056/nejmoa1312625 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.XIE Z Q, WANG Z, FAN F Y, et al. Structural insights into a shared mechanism of human STING activation by a potent agonist and an autoimmune disease-associated mutation[J]. Cell Discov, 2022, 8(1): 133. 10.1038/s41421-022-00481-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.STAELS F, BETRAINS A, DOUBEL P, et al. Adult-onset ANCA-associated vasculitis in SAVI: extension of the phenotypic spectrum, case report and review of the literature[J]. Front Immunol, 2020, 11: 575219. 10.3389/fimmu.2020.575219 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.BENMERZOUG S, ROSE S, BOUNAB B, et al. STING-dependent sensing of self-DNA drives silica-induced lung inflammation[J]. Nat Commun, 2018, 9(1): 5226. 10.1038/s41467-018-07425-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.LUO X, LI H, MA L, et al. Expression of STING is increased in liver tissues from patients with NAFLD and promotes macrophage-mediated hepatic inflammation and fibrosis in mice[J]. Gastroenterology, 2018, 155(6): 1971-1984.e4. 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.09.010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.CHUNG K W, DHILLON P, HUANG S, et al. Mitochondrial damage and activation of the STING pathway lead to renal inflammation and fibrosis[J]. Cell Metab, 2019, 30(4): 784-799.e5. 10.1016/j.cmet.2019.08.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.KING K R, AGUIRRE A D, YE Y X, et al. IRF3 and type Ⅰ interferons fuel a fatal response to myocardial infarction[J]. Nat Med, 2017, 23(12): 1481-1487. 10.1038/nm.4428 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.SLITER D A, MARTINEZ J, HAO L, et al. Parkin and PINK1 mitigate STING-induced inflammation[J]. Nature, 2018, 561(7722): 258-262. 10.1038/s41586-018-0448-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] [Retracted]
  • 66.FREISCHMIDT A, WIELAND T, RICHTER B, et al. Haploinsufficiency of TBK1 causes familial ALS and fronto-temporal dementia[J]. Nat Neurosci, 2015, 18(5): 631-636. 10.1038/nn.4000 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.CIRULLI E T, LASSEIGNE B N, PETROVSKI S, et al. Exome sequencing in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis identifies risk genes and pathways[J]. Science, 2015, 347(6229): 1436-1441. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.HANAHAN D, WEINBERG R A. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation[J]. Cell, 2011, 144(5): 646-674. 10.1016/j.cell.2011.02.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.VANPOUILLE-BOX C, DEMARIA S, FORMENTI S C, et al. Cytosolic DNA sensing in organismal tumor control[J]. Cancer Cell, 2018, 34(3): 361-378. 10.1016/j.ccell.2018.05.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.NG K W, MARSHALL E A, BELL J C, et al. cGAS-STING and cancer: dichotomous roles in tumor immunity and development[J]. Trends Immunol, 2018, 39(1): 44-54. 10.1016/j.it.2017.07.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.KIM C, KIM W, HAN Y, et al. Cancer immunotherapy with STING agonist and PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor effectively suppresses peritoneal carcinomatosis of colon cancer[J]. Ann Oncol, 2019, 30(Suppl 4): iv35. 10.1093/annonc/mdz155.130 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.GHAFFARI A, PETERSON N, KHALAJ K, et al. STING agonist therapy in combination with PD-1 immune checkpoint blockade enhances response to carboplatin chemotherapy in high-grade serous ovarian cancer[J]. Br J Cancer, 2018, 119(4): 440-449. 10.1038/s41416-018-0188-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.FU J, KANNE D B, LEONG M, et al. STING agonist formulated cancer vaccines can cure established tumors resistant to PD-1 blockade[J]. Sci Transl Med, 2015, 7(283): 283ra52. 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaa4306 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.TANG C H, ZUNDELL J A, RANATUNGA S, et al. Agonist-mediated activation of STING induces apoptosis in malignant B cells[J]. Cancer Res, 2016, 76(8): 2137-2152. 10.1158/0008-5472.can-15-1885 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.LIU H, ZHANG H, WU X, et al. Nuclear cGAS suppresses DNA repair and promotes tumorigenesis[J]. Nature, 2018, 563(7729): 131-136. 10.1038/s41586-018-0629-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.BAKHOUM S F, NGO B, LAUGHNEY A M, et al. Chromosomal instability drives metastasis through a cytosolic DNA response[J]. Nature, 2018, 553(7689): 467-472. 10.1038/nature25432 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.PLOWMAN G D, SUDARSANAM S, BINGHAM J, et al. The protein kinases of Caenorhabditis elegans: a model for signal transduction in multicellular organisms[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 1999, 96(24): 13603-13610. 10.1073/pnas.96.24.13603 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.ROBINSON D R, WU Y M, LIN S F. The protein tyrosine kinase family of the human genome[J]. Oncogene, 2000, 19(49): 5548-5557. 10.1038/sj.onc.1203957 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.HUNTER T. The Croonian Lecture 1997. The pho-sphorylation of proteins on tyrosine: its role in cell growth and disease[J]. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci, 1998, 353(1368): 583-605. 10.1098/rstb.1998.0228 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.TAUTZ L, CRITTON D A, GROTEGUT S. Protein tyrosine phosphatases: structure, function, and impli-cation in human disease[J]. Methods Mol Biol, 2013, 1053: 179-221. 10.1007/978-1-62703-562-0_13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.ANDERSEN J N, MORTENSEN O H, PETERS G H, et al. Structural and evolutionary relationships among protein tyrosine phosphatase domains[J]. Mol Cell Biol, 2001, 21(21): 7117-7136. 10.1128/mcb.21.21.7117-7136.2001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.BOTTINI N, BOTTINI E, GLORIA-BOTTINI F, et al. Low-molecular-weight protein tyrosine phosphatase and human disease: in search of biochemical mechanisms[J]. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz), 2002, 50(2): 95-104. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.YANG Y L, CAO L B, HE W R, et al. Endocytosis triggers V-ATPase-SYK-mediated priming of cGAS activation and innate immune response[J/OL]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2022, 119(43): e2207280119. 10.1073/pnas.2207280119 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.DUNKER W, ZAVER S A, PINEDA J, et al. The proto-oncogene SRC phosphorylates cGAS to inhibit an antitumor immune response[J/OL]. JCI Insight, 2023, 8(12): e167270. 10.1172/jci.insight.167270 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.HU M M, HE W R, GAO P, et al. Virus-induced accumulation of intracellular bile acids activates the TGR5-β-arrestin-SRC axis to enable innate antiviral immunity[J]. Cell Res, 2019, 29(3): 193-205. 10.1038/s41422-018-0136-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.GAO P, HU M M, SHU H B. CSK promotes innate immune response to DNA virus by phosphorylating MITA[J]. Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 2020, 526(1): 199-205. 10.1016/j.bbrc.2020.03.069 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.XIA T, YI X M, WU X, et al. PTPN1/2-mediated dephosphorylation of MITA/STING promotes its 20S proteasomal degradation and attenuates innate antiviral response[J]. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2019, 116(40): 20063-20069. 10.1073/pnas.1906431116 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.WANG C, WANG X, VELEEPARAMBIL M, et al. EGFR-mediated tyrosine phosphorylation of STING determines its trafficking route and cellular innate immunity functions[J/OL]. EMBO J, 2020, 39(22): e104106. 10.15252/embj.2019104106 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.WANG C, SHARMA N, VELEEPARAMBIL M, et al. STING-mediated interferon induction by herpes simplex virus 1 requires the protein tyrosine kinase Syk[J/OL]. mBio, 2021, 12(6): e0322821. 10.1128/mbio.03228-21 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.WANG Y, QIAN G, ZHU L, et al. HIV-1 Vif suppresses antiviral immunity by targeting STING[J]. Cell Mol Immunol, 2022, 19(1): 108-121. 10.1038/s41423-021-00802-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.LIU S, CHEN S, LI X, et al. Lck/Hck/Fgr-mediated tyrosine phosphorylation negatively regulates TBK1 to restrain innate antiviral responses[J]. Cell Host Microbe, 2017, 21(6): 754-768.e5. 10.1016/j.chom.2017.05.010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.DE WISPELAERE M, LACROIX A J, YANG P L. The small molecules AZD0530 and dasatinib inhibit dengue virus RNA replication via Fyn kinase[J]. J Virol, 2013, 87(13): 7367-7381. 10.1128/jvi.00632-13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93.LI X, YANG M, YU Z, et al. The tyrosine kinase Src promotes phosphorylation of the kinase TBK1 to facilitate type Ⅰ interferon production after viral infection[J]. Sci Signal, 2017, 10(460): eaae0435. 10.1126/scisignal.aae0435 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94.WEN C, YAN Z, YANG X, et al. Identification of tyrosine-9 of MAVS as critical target for inducible phosphorylation that determines activation[J/OL]. PLoS One, 2012, 7(7): e41687. 10.1371/journal.pone.0041687 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95.CHENG J, LIAO Y, XIAO L, et al. Autophagy regulates MAVS signaling activation in a phosphorylation-dependent manner in microglia[J]. Cell Death Differ, 2017, 24(2): 276-287. 10.1038/cdd.2016.121 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96.LUO F, LIU H, YANG S, et al. Nonreceptor tyrosine kinase c-Abl- and Arg-mediated IRF3 phosphorylation regulates innate immune responses by promoting type Ⅰ IFN production[J]. J Immunol, 2019, 202(8): 2254-2265. 10.4049/jimmunol.1800461 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97.ZHANG Z, YUAN B, BAO M, et al. The helicase DDX41 senses intracellular DNA mediated by the adaptor STING in dendritic cells[J]. Nat Immunol, 2011, 12(10): 959-965. 10.1038/ni.2091 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98.LEE K G, KIM S S, KUI L, et al. Bruton’s tyrosine kinase phosphorylates DDX41 and activates its binding of dsDNA and STING to initiate type 1 interferon response[J]. Cell Rep, 2015, 10(7): 1055-1065. 10.1016/j.celrep.2015.01.039 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99.HARA H, TSUCHIYA K, KAWAMURA I, et al. Phosphorylation of the adaptor ASC acts as a molecular switch that controls the formation of speck-like aggregates and inflammasome activity[J]. Nat Immunol, 2013, 14(12): 1247-1255. 10.1038/ni.2749 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100.WU S, ZHANG Q, ZHANG F, et al. HER2 recruits AKT1 to disrupt STING signalling and suppress antiviral defence and antitumour immunity[J]. Nat Cell Biol, 2019, 21(8): 1027-1040. 10.1038/s41556-019-0352-z [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Zhejiang University (Medical Sciences) are provided here courtesy of Zhejiang University Press

RESOURCES