Key result
Viral proteins have evolved mechanisms to inhibit the activation and downstream activity of host protein kinase R (PKR) to evade the innate immune response and allow viral replication.
This review summarizes the mechanisms by which viral proteins inhibit host protein kinase R to evade the innate immune response.
Novel PKR insights in innate immunity; leaves open therapeutic targeting pending validation.
The innate immune system offers a first line of defense by neutralizing foreign pathogens such as bacteria, fungi, and viruses. These pathogens express molecules (RNA and proteins) that have discrete structures, known as the pathogen-associated molecular patterns that are recognized by a highly specialized class of host proteins called pattern recognition receptors to facilitate the host's immune response against infection. The RNA-dependent Protein Kinase R (PKR) is one of the host's pattern recognition receptors that is a key component of an innate immune system. PKR recognizes imperfectly double-stranded non-coding viral RNA molecules via its N-terminal double-stranded RNA binding motifs, undergoes phosphorylation of the C-terminal kinase domain, ultimately resulting in inhibition of viral protein translation by inhibiting the guanine nucleotide exchange activity of eukaryotic initiation factor 2α. Not surprisingly, viruses have evolved mechanisms by which viral non-coding RNA or protein molecules inhibit PKR's activation and/or its downstream activity to allow viral replication. In this review, we will highlight the role of viral proteins in inhibiting PKR's activity and summarize currently known mechanisms by which viral proteins execute such inhibitory activity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dzananovic et al. (2018) conducted a review in Viral infection. Viral proteins was evaluated. Viral proteins have evolved mechanisms to inhibit the activation and downstream activity of host protein kinase R (PKR) to evade the innate immune response and allow viral replication.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: