Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31015330›Full record

ArticlemBio2019

Enhanced Replication of Mouse Adenovirus Type 1 following Virus-Induced Degradation of Protein Kinase R (PKR).

Danielle E Goodman, Carla D Pretto, Tomas A Krepostman, Kelly E Carnahan, Katherine R Spindler

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in mBio, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Inhibition of PKR by Viruses.Frontiers in microbiology · 2021
    Review
  7. Article
  8. The integrated stress response in pulmonary disease.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2020
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Danielle E GoodmanDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Carla D PrettoDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Tomas A KrepostmanDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Kelly E CarnahanDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Katherine R SpindlerDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA krspin@umich.edu.
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor · US

Funding

CELLULAR AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY AT MICHIGANT32GM007315 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI PUTHENVEEDU, MANOJKUMAR A · 1985 to 2021
$12.8M
Viral interaction with host eIF2alpha kinasesR01AI133935 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI SPINDLER, KATHERINE R. · 2018 to 2022
$3.0M
Mechanisms of blood-brain barrier disruption by an encephalitic virusR01AI091721 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI SPINDLER, KATHERINE R. · 2011 to 2015
$2.5M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI091721NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI133935NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM007315
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protein kinase R (PKR) plays a major role in activating host immunity during infection by sensing double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) produced by viruses. Once activated by dsRNA, PKR phosphorylates the translation factor eukaryotic initiation factor 2α (eIF2α), halting cellular translation. Many viruses have methods of inhibiting PKR activation or its downstream effects, circumventing protein synthesis shutdown. These include sequestering dsRNA or producing proteins that bind to and inhibit PKR activation. Here we describe our finding that in multiple cell types, PKR was depleted during mouse adenovirus type 1 (MAV-1) infection. MAV-1 did not appear to be targeting PKR at the transcriptional or translational level, because total PKR mRNA levels and levels of PKR mRNA bound to polysomes were unchanged or increased during MAV-1 infection. However, inhibiting the proteasome reduced the PKR depletion seen in MAV-1-infected cells, whereas inhibiting the lysosome had no effect. This suggests that proteasomal degradation alone is responsible for PKR degradation during MAV-1 infection. Time course experiments indicated that the degradation occurs early after infection. Infecting cells with UV-inactivated virus prevented PKR degradation, whereas inhibiting viral DNA replication did not. Together, these results suggest that an early viral gene is responsible. Degradation of PKR is a rare mechanism to oppose PKR activity, and it has been described in only six RNA viruses. To our knowledge, this is the first example of a DNA virus counteracting PKR by degrading it.

Indexed as

Host-Pathogen InteractionsProteolysisVirus ReplicationAnimalsCell LineeIF-2 KinaseImmune EvasionImmunity, InnateMastadenovirusMiceProteasome Endopeptidase ComplexeIF-2 KinaseProteasome Endopeptidase Complexprotein kinase R, mouseadenoviruseseIF2alpha kinasePKRproteasomeprotein degradationprotein stability

Identifiers

PMID31015330
PMCPMC6479006
OpenAlexW2924007191

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.