Optimal cellular health requires normal protein function which, in turn, is dependent on proteins “folding” into their appropriate three dimensional conformations. Roughly a third of cellular proteins undergo folding in the lumen of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). However, under stressful conditions, unfolded proteins sometimes accumulate. This initiates a process termed the unfolded protein response (UPR)1. One arm of the UPR is activated by the ER membrane protein ATF6, a fragment of which moves to the nucleus where it functions as a transcription factor to activate genes that mediate protein folding. Unexpectedly, Jin et al report in the current issue of Circulation Research a new function for ATF6: to transcriptionally activate the expression of a repertoire of antioxidant genes, many of which encode proteins that reside outside of the ER2. Moreover, data are presented supporting a model in which this antioxidant program attenuates myocardial damage from ischemia/reperfusion.
Some of the information required for protein folding is intrinsic to its amino acid sequence, but chaperones are critical for most proteins to assume their appropriate conformation. Chaperones are a biochemically diverse group of proteins that reside in subcellular compartments where protein folding takes place (e.g. cytosol, mitochondria, ER). Essentially all proteins destined for various cellular membranes and most that will be secreted are directed to the ER by a signal sequence as they exit ribosomes in the cytoplasm. Folding in the ER is coordinated with post-translational modifications that include removal of the signal sequence, N-linked glycosylation, and disulfide bond formation3. These events require the integrated actions of several classes of chaperones, oxidoreductases (including protein disulfide isomerases), and prolyl peptidyl cis-trans isomerases.
When everything proceeds according to plan, high quality proteins are produced and the cell is happy. However, things can go awry. While genetic mutations in proteins can predispose them to abnormal folding, even more common are various cellular stresses, including hypoxia, reactive oxygen species, abnormalities in Ca2+ handling, and metabolic perturbations4. The first line of defense is designed to correct the situation by refolding the denatured proteins. This is accomplished by (a) temporarily putting the brakes on translation so as to decrease the load of additional proteins delivered to the ER; (b) augmenting the protein folding machinery; and (c) eliminating terminally misfolded proteins through ER-associated degradation (ERAD; which utilizes the proteasome) and autophagy (which utilizes the lysosome). If all of the above fail, the UPR may signal the cell to undergo apoptosis, although the precise determinants of this decision are poorly understood5.
Three intertwined pathways comprise the UPR1. Each is initiated by an integral ER membrane protein that serves as a sensor for unfolded proteins in the ER lumen: (a) PERK (protein kinase RNA-like endoplasmic reticulum kinase); (b) IRE1 (inositol-requiring enzyme 1α); and (c) ATF6 (activating transcription factor 6). When ER protein folding is efficient, these three proteins are held inactive by interaction with the chaperone GRP78 (78 kDa glucose-regulated protein; also known as BiP). Although some evidence suggests that IRE1 and perhaps PERK can directly detect misfolded proteins, the canonical model is that activation of the UPR occurs when GRP78 is recruited away to interact with now exposed hydrophobic regions of misfolded proteins. This allows PERK to dimerize, autophosphorylate, and become an active kinase, which then phosphorylates the α subunit of eukaryotic initiation factor 2 (eIF2α). This results in attenuation of the translation of most mRNAs. However, phosphorylated eIF2α also upregulates translation of a subset of mRNAs that contain inhibitory open reading frames in their 5’ untranslated regions - one being ATF4 (activating transcription factor 4), which activates genes involved in the UPR. Release from GRP78 also promotes IRE1 dimerization and autophosphorylation, which activates a latent endonuclease function in this protein. IRE1 then splices out 26 nucleotides from the mRNA encoding XBP1 (X-box binding protein 1) in the cytoplasm, causing a frame shift that results in production of XBP1s. This protein functions as a transcription factor for genes encoding chaperones and ERAD components. Finally, dissociation of GRP78 allows ATF6 to translocate to the Golgi, where it is cleaved by two proteases that release its N-terminal half to move to the nucleus where it functions as a transcription factor that activates genes involved in protein folding.
While the UPR was identified over twenty-five years ago6, its pathogenic role in heart disease has been appreciated more recently. Of relevance to the current paper, all three arms of the UPR are activated during ischemia/reperfusion, and the UPR appears to attenuate the magnitude of myocardial damage in this context7. This has been demonstrated using experimental induction of the UPR with tunicamycin (inhibits N-linked protein glycosylation in the ER lumen) or thapsigargin (inhibits the sarcoplasmic/endoplasmic reticulum Ca2+ ATPase, thereby interfering with Ca2+ uptake into the ER)8. More specific approaches have included overexpression of XBP19 or ATF610, which reduce ischemia/reperfusion injury, and conversely this damage is exacerbated by XBP1 deletion9.
Jin et al have substantially extended their previous ATF6 overexpression studies to define the role of endogenous ATF6 in modulating ischemia/reperfusion injury and, in the process, have revealed an unexpected mechanism that contributes to the beneficial effects of this pathway. Using a combination of loss and gain of function approaches in cultured neonatal and adult cardiomyocytes, isolated perfused hearts, and intact mice, the authors demonstrated that endogenous levels of ATF6 are important for limiting ischemia/reperfusion-induced oxidative stress, cardiomyocyte death (likely necrosis), infarct size, and systolic dysfunction. They then went on to discover that, in addition to its known role in activating the transcription of genes encoding ER chaperones, ATF6 also activates the expression of multiple antioxidant genes. Of particular interest, some of the most highly induced antioxidants reside in non-ER locations, including catalase (peroxisomes) and Prdx5 (mitochondria and peroxisomes) – implying that ATF6 is inducing a generalized antioxidant program. They next explored the mechanism of induction and functional significance of catalase in more depth. First, not only is ATF6 sufficient to induce catalase, it appears to be required – both in response to generic ER stressors and ischemia/reperfusion. Second, chromatin immunoprecipitation data suggest that ATF6 acts directly on the catalase promoter. Finally, administration of catalase reversed the increments in cell death, myocardial tissue damage, and cardiac dysfunction resulting from ATF6 deletion. Thus, the activation of endogenous ATF6 limits cardiac damage during ischemia/reperfusion at least in part by inducing catalase.
Based on these data, the authors propose a two-phase model (Figure 1): First, hypoxia resulting from ischemia is the major stimulus for protein misfolding in the ER and subsequent activation of ATF6. This is plausible because oxygen is a necessary substrate in the series of redox reactions (see Fig 8E of Jin et al) that regenerate active (oxidized) protein disulfide isomerases11 - critical for disulfide bond formation and protein folding. Their data showing that ATF6 is activated during ischemia are consistent with this notion. It remains possible, however, that other factors which operate during reperfusion (e.g. oxidative and metabolic stresses) also contribute to protein misfolding in the ER.
Figure 1. ATF6 induces an antioxidant program outside of the ER.
Ischemia impairs protein folding in the ER lumen in part because oxygen is required in the redox cascades that regenerate active protein disulfide isomerases. Other stresses induced by reperfusion may also contribute (see text; dotted line). Unfolded proteins in the ER lumen recruit the chaperone GRP78 away from PERK, IRE1, and ATF6, leading to their activation and initiation of the unfolded protein response. ATF6 translocates to the Golgi where it is cleaved by two proteases (scissors), which releases its cytoplasmic domain to move to the nucleus where it functions as a transcription factor. In addition to activating the expression of genes whose products mediate protein refolding (not shown), ATF6 activates the transcription of an antioxidant program. Some of the encoded proteins, such as catalase, reside in non-ER locations.
The second phase is that ATF6-dependent induction of the antioxidant gene program neutralizes ROS. But where is this ROS coming from? It is well accepted that a large portion of ROS during reperfusion originates in the mitochondria. Moreover, the induction of Prdx5 is consistent with ATF6 playing a role in neutralizing reactive species in this location, although this remains to be formally tested. But, ROS formation also takes place in other cellular compartments during reperfusion. In fact, protein refolding in the ER itself generates significant oxidative stress12. Interestingly, ATF6-mediated induction of ER-localized antioxidants was not as robust as the induction of antioxidant proteins that reside in other locations. Whether this reflects the proteins that were studied or the general principle that ATF6 induces primarily a non-ER-localized antioxidant program will require further investigation.
An additional novel aspect of the antioxidant program reported by Jin et al is the proportion of ATF6-inducible genes that encode selenoproteins13, including Prdx5. Selenoproteins contain a 21st amino acid, selenocysteine, in which a selenium atom is substituted for the sulfur in cysteine. This amino acid is specified by the UGA stop codon in combination with mechanisms that suppress polypeptide chain termination. Selenoproteins are uncommon (only 25 in the human genome), but appear to play important roles in antioxidant signaling. Their roles in heart disease remain to be fully defined.
In summary, this study provides the first evidence in any cell type linking the ER UPR mediator ATF6 with direct transcriptional induction of antioxidant proteins, many of which reside outside of the ER. Moreover, this mechanism plays an important role in attenuating myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury. Additional studies will be needed to define potential roles of this pathway in normal biology and other disease states.
Acknowledgments
We thank Dr. Xuejun Wang for critical comments.
Sources of Funding
RNK is supported by grants from the NIH (R01HL128071 and R01HL130861), Department of Defense, American Heart Association, Fondation Leducq, and the Dr. Gerald and Myra Dorros Chair in Cardiovascular Disease. WMM was supported by an NIH predoctoral fellowship (T32GM007491). We thank the generosity of the Wilf Family for their support of this work.
Footnotes
Disclosures
None
References
- 1.Walter P, Ron D. The unfolded protein response: from stress pathway to homeostatic regulation. Science. 2011;334:1081–1086. doi: 10.1126/science.1209038. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Jin JK, Blackwood EA, Azizi KM, Thuerauf DJ, Fahem AG, Hofmann C, Kaufman RJ, Doroudgar S, Glembotski CC. ATF6 Decreases Myocardial Ischemia/Reperfusion Damage and Links ER Stress and Oxidative Stress Signaling Pathways in the Heart. Circ Res. 2016 doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.116.310266. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Braakman I, Hebert DN. Protein folding in the endoplasmic reticulum. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2013;5:a013201. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a013201. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Cao SS, Kaufman RJ. Endoplasmic reticulum stress and oxidative stress in cell fate decision and human disease. Antioxid Redox Signal. 2014;21:396–413. doi: 10.1089/ars.2014.5851. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Tabas I, Ron D. Integrating the mechanisms of apoptosis induced by endoplasmic reticulum stress. Nat Cell Biol. 2011;13:184–190. doi: 10.1038/ncb0311-184. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Kozutsumi Y, Segal M, Normington K, Gething MJ, Sambrook J. The presence of malfolded proteins in the endoplasmic reticulum signals the induction of glucose-regulated proteins. Nature. 1988;332:462–464. doi: 10.1038/332462a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Wang ZV, Hill JA. Protein quality control and metabolism: bidirectional control in the heart. Cell Metab. 2015;21:215–226. doi: 10.1016/j.cmet.2015.01.016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Petrovski G, Das S, Juhasz B, Kertesz A, Tosaki A and Das DK. Cardioprotection by endoplasmic reticulum stress-induced autophagy. Antioxid Redox Signal. 2011;14:2191–2200. doi: 10.1089/ars.2010.3486. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Wang ZV, Deng Y, Gao N, Pedrozo Z, Li DL, Morales CR, Criollo A, Luo X, Tan W, Jiang N, Lehrman MA, Rothermel BA, Lee AH, Lavandero S, Mammen PP, Ferdous A, Gillette TG, Scherer PE and Hill JA. Spliced X-box binding protein 1 couples the unfolded protein response to hexosamine biosynthetic pathway. Cell. 2014;156:1179–1192. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.01.014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Martindale JJ, Fernandez R, Thuerauf D, Whittaker R, Gude N, Sussman MA, Glembotski CC. Endoplasmic reticulum stress gene induction and protection from ischemia/reperfusion injury in the hearts of transgenic mice with a tamoxifen-regulated form of ATF6. Circ Res. 2006;98:1186–1193. doi: 10.1161/01.RES.0000220643.65941.8d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Delaunay-Moisan A, Appenzeller-Herzog C. The antioxidant machinery of the endoplasmic reticulum: Protection and signaling. Free Radic Biol Med. 2015;83:341–351. doi: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2015.02.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Haynes CM, Titus EA, Cooper AA. Degradation of misfolded proteins prevents ER-derived oxidative stress and cell death. Mol Cell. 2004;15:767–776. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2004.08.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Kryukov GV, Castellano S, Novoselov SV, Lobanov AV, Zehtab O, Guigo R, Gladyshev VN. Characterization of mammalian selenoproteomes. Science. 2003;300:1439–1443. doi: 10.1126/science.1083516. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

