Abstract

Atherosclerosis is a chronic inflammatory disease of the blood vessels, characterized by atherosclerotic lesion formation. Vascular Smooth Muscle Cells (VSMC), macrophages (MΦ), and dendritic cells (DC) play a crucial role in vascular inflammation and atherosclerosis. Interferon (IFN)α, IFNγ, and Toll-like receptor (TLR)4 activate pro-inflammatory gene expression and are pro-atherogenic. Gene expression regulation of many pro-inflammatory genes has shown to rely on Signal Integration (SI) between IFNs and TLR4 through combinatorial actions of the Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription (STAT)1 complexes ISGF3 and γ-activated factor (GAF), and Nuclear Factor-κB (NFκB). Thus, IFN pre-treatment (“priming”) followed by LPS stimulation leads to enhanced transcriptional responses as compared to the individual stimuli. To characterize the mechanism of priming-induced IFNα + LPS- and IFNγ + LPS-dependent SI in vascular cells as compared to immune cells, we performed a comprehensive genome-wide analysis of mouse VSMC, MΦ, and DC in response to IFNα, IFNγ, and/or LPS. Thus, we identified IFNα + LPS or IFNγ + LPS induced genes commonly expressed in these cell types that bound STAT1 and p65 at comparable γ-activated sequence (GAS), Interferon-stimulated response element (ISRE), or NFκB sites in promoter proximal and distal regions. Comparison of the relatively high number of overlapping ISRE sites in these genes unraveled a novel role of ISGF3 and possibly STAT1/IRF9 in IFNγ responses. In addition, similar STAT1-p65 co-binding modes were detected for IFNα + LPS and IFNγ + LPS up-regulated genes, which involved recruitment of STAT1 complexes preceding p65 to closely located GAS/NFκB or ISRE/NFκB composite sites already upon IFNα or IFNγ treatment. This STAT1-p65 co-binding significantly increased after subsequent LPS exposure and correlated with histone acetylation, PolII recruitment, and amplified target gene transcription in a STAT1-p65 co-bound dependent manner. Thus, co-binding of STAT1-containing transcription factor complexes and NFκB, activated by IFN-I or IFN-II together with LPS, provides a platform for robust transcriptional activation of pro-inflammatory genes. Moreover, our data offer an explanation for the comparable effects of IFNα or IFNγ priming on TLR4-induced activation in vascular and immune cells, with important implications in atherosclerosis.

Highlights

  • Atherosclerosis is a chronic inflammatory disease of the blood vessels, characterized by atherosclerotic lesion formation

  • Our results suggest that STAT1 and p65 bind to DNA independently, yet in a sequential manner, directed by IFNI or IFN-II treatment followed by LPS stimulation

  • We aimed at providing mechanistic insight in the cooperative binding of STAT1 complexes with Nuclear FactorκB (NFκB) to Interferon-stimulated response element (ISRE)/NFκB and/or GAS/NFκB binding sites in relation to transcription and how this is involved in the overlap of IFN-I/LPS and IFN-II/LPS activated Signal Integration (SI) in Vascular Smooth Muscle Cells (VSMC)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Atherosclerosis is a chronic inflammatory disease of the blood vessels, characterized by atherosclerotic lesion formation. Type I (IFNI; IFNα), and II (IFN-II; IFNγ) IFNs both induce IFNstimulated gene (ISG) expression through Janus kinase (JAK)dependent phosphorylation of Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription (STAT). STAT1 homodimers, known as γactivated factor (GAF), activate transcription in response to both IFN types by direct binding to IFN-II activation site γ-activated sequence (GAS)-containing genes. Association of Interferon Regulatory Factor (IRF) with STAT1–STAT2 heterodimers [known as Interferon-stimulated gene factor 3 (ISGF3)] in response to IFN-I, redirects these complexes to a distinct group of target genes harboring the Interferon-stimulated response element (ISRE) [5, 6]. The partially overlapping and differential activation of transcription factor complexes and regulation of target gene expression by IFN-I and IFN-II, may be a consequence of the biological similarities and differences of these two IFN types

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call