A systems-biology model of the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) interactions with TNF receptor 1 and 2

A New Histology-Based Prognostic Index for Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Preliminary Results for the "AML Urayasu Classification"

Background: This study was aimed at elucidating the mechanisms underlying the development of treatment resistance in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) other than M3 myeloid leukemia in order to devise ways to overcome treatment resistance and improve the treatment outcomes in these patients. Methods: For this study, we randomly selected 35 patients with AML who had received combined cytarabine plus idarubicin treatment for new-onset AML at our hospital. We performed immunohistochemical analysis of biopsy specimens obtained from the patients to investigate the expressions of 23 treatment-resistance-related proteins, and retrospectively analyzed the correlations between the expression profiles of the resistance proteins and the patient survival. Results: The following four proteins were identified as being particularly significant in relation to treatment resistance and patient prognosis: (1) p53; (2) multidrug resistance-associated protein 1 (MRP1; idarubicin extracellular efflux pump); (3) aldo-keto reductase family 1 member B10 (AKR1B10; idarubicin-inactivating enzyme); and (4) AKR1B1 (competitive inhibitor of AKR1B10). Based on our findings, we propose the following Urayasu classification for AML, which we believe would be very useful for accurately stratifying patients with AML according to the predicted prognosis: Group 1 (n = 22, 63%): p53(-)/MRP1(-) associated with AKR1B10(+)/AKR1B1(+) or AKR1B10(-)/AKR1B1(-); 5-year overall survival (OS), 82%-100%; Group 2 (n = 9, 26%): p53(-)/MRP1(-) associated with AKR1B10(+)/AKR1B1(-); 5-year OS, 68%; Group 3 (n = 4, 11%): p53(+) or MRP1(+); median survival, 12-14 months; 2-year OS, 0%. Conclusions: The Urayasu classification for AML is useful for predicting the prognosis of patients with AML. Group 1 in this classification included twice as many patients as that included in the Favorable prognosis group in the AML prognostic classification proposed by the European Leukemia Net. As the Urayasu classification for AML is based on the mechanisms of resistance to chemotherapy, it is not only useful for prognostic stratification of the patients, but also provides insights for developing more effective treatments for AML.

TNF receptors: Structure-function relationships and therapeutic targeting strategies

Tumor necrosis factor receptors (TNFR1 and TNFR2) play key roles in mediating inflammatory response and cell death signaling, which are associated with autoimmune disorders, neurodegenerative diseases, and cancers. The structure-function relationships of TNF receptors and their ligands determine the activation or inhibition of downstream signaling pathways. Available crystal structures have provided critical insights into the therapeutic targeting strategies of TNF receptors and their signaling networks. In this review, we discuss the potential of targeting receptor-ligand and receptor-receptor interactions in a competitive manner as well as perturbing receptor conformational dynamics through an allosteric mechanism to modulate TNF receptor signaling. We propose that conformational states of TNF receptors can act as a molecular switch in determining their functions and are important therapeutic targets. The knowledge of the structure-function relationships of TNF receptors can be applied to translational high-throughput drug screening and design of novel receptor-specific modulators with enhanced pharmacological properties.

Emerging functions and therapeutic targets of IL-38 in central nervous system diseases

Interleukin (IL)-38 is a newly discovered cytokine of the IL-1 family, which binds various receptors (i.e., IL-36R, IL-1 receptor accessory protein-like 1, and IL-1R1) in the central nervous system (CNS). The hallmark physiological function of IL-38 is competitive binding to IL-36R, as does the IL-36R antagonist. Emerging research has shown that IL-38 is abnormally expressed in the serum and brain tissue of patients with ischemic stroke (IS) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD), suggesting that IL-38 may play an important role in neurological diseases. Important advances include that IL-38 alleviates neuromyelitis optica disorder (NMOD) by inhibiting Th17 expression, improves IS by protecting against atherosclerosis via regulating immune cells and inflammation, and reduces IL-1β and CXCL8 release through inhibiting human microglial activity post-ASD. In contrast, IL-38 mRNA is markedly increased and is mainly expressed in phagocytes in spinal cord injury (SCI). IL-38 ablation attenuated SCI by reducing immune cell infiltration. However, the effect and underlying mechanism of IL-38 in CNS diseases remain inadequately characterized. In this review, we summarize the biological characteristics, pathophysiological role, and potential mechanisms of IL-38 in CNS diseases (e.g., NMOD, Alzheimer's disease, ASD, IS, TBI, and SCI), aiming to explore the therapeutic potential of IL-38 in the prevention and treatment of CNS diseases.

How does the same ligand activate signaling of different receptors in TNFR superfamily: a computational study

TNFα is a highly pleiotropic cytokine inducing inflammatory signaling pathways. It is initially presented on plasma membrane of cells (mTNFα), and also exists in a soluble variant (sTNFα) after cleavage. The ligand is shared by two structurally similar receptors, TNFR1 and TNFR2. Interestingly, while sTNFα preferentially stimulates TNFR1, TNFR2 signaling can only be activated by mTNFα. How can two similar receptors respond to the same ligand in such a different way? We employed computational simulations in multiple scales to address this question. We found that both mTNFα and sTNFα can trigger the clustering of TNFR1. The size of clusters induced by sTNFα is constantly larger than the clusters induced by mTNFα. The systems of TNFR2, on the other hand, show very different behaviors. Only when the interactions between TNFR2 are very weak, mTNFα can trigger the receptors to form very large clusters. Given the same weak binding affinity, only small oligomers were obtained in the system of sTNFα. Considering that TNF-mediated signaling is modulated by the ligand-induced clustering of receptors on cell surface, our study provided the mechanistic foundation to the phenomenon that different isoforms of the ligand can lead to highly distinctive signaling patterns for its receptors.

TNF and TNF receptors as therapeutic targets for rheumatic diseases and beyond

The cytokine TNF signals via two distinct receptors, TNF receptor 1 (TNFR1) and TNFR2, and is a central mediator of various immune-mediated diseases. Indeed, TNF-neutralizing biologic drugs have been in clinical use for the treatment of many inflammatory pathological conditions, including various rheumatic diseases, for decades. TNF has pleiotropic effects and can both promote and inhibit pro-inflammatory processes. The integrated net effect of TNF in vivo is a result of cytotoxic TNFR1 signalling and the stimulation of pro-inflammatory processes mediated by TNFR1 and TNFR2 and also TNFR2-mediated anti-inflammatory and tissue-protective activities. Inhibition of the beneficial activities of TNFR2 might explain why TNF-neutralizing drugs, although highly effective in some diseases, have limited benefit in the treatment of other TNF-associated pathological conditions (such as graft-versus-host disease) or even worsen the pathological condition (such as multiple sclerosis). Receptor-specific biologic drugs have the potential to tip the balance from TNFR1-mediated activities to TNFR2-mediated activities and enable the treatment of diseases that do not respond to current TNF inhibitors. Accordingly, a variety of reagents have been developed that either selectively inhibit TNFR1 or selectively activate TNFR2. Several of these reagents have shown promise in preclinical studies and are now in, or approaching, clinical trials.

Glycobiology of cellular expiry: Decrypting the role of glycan-lectin regulatory complex and therapeutic strategies focusing on cancer

Often the outer leaflets of living cells bear a coat of glycosylated proteins, which primarily regulates cellular processes. Glycosylation of such proteins occurs as part of their post-translational modification. Within the endoplasmic reticulum, glycosylation enables the attachment of specific oligosaccharide moieties such as, 'glycan' to the transmembrane receptor proteins which confers precise biological information for governing the cell fate. The nature and degree of glycosylation of cell surface receptors are regulated by a bunch of glycosyl transferases and glycosidases which fine-tune attachment or detachment of glycan moieties. In classical death receptors, upregulation of glycosylation by glycosyl transferases is capable of inducing cell death in T cells, tumor cells, etc. Thus, any deregulated alternation at surface glycosylation of these death receptors can result in life-threatening disorder like cancer. In addition, transmembrane glycoproteins and lectin receptors can transduce intracellular signals for cell death execution. Exogenous interaction of lectins with glycan containing death receptors signals for cell death initiation by modulating downstream signalings. Subsequently, endogenous glycan-lectin interplay aids in the customization and implementation of the cell death program. Lastly, the glycan-lectin recognition system dictates the removal of apoptotic cells by sending accurate signals to the extracellular milieu. Since glycosylation has proven to be a biomarker of cellular death and disease progression; glycans serve as specific therapeutic targets of cancers. In this context, we are reviewing the molecular mechanisms of the glycan-lectin regulatory network as an integral part of cell death machinery in cancer to target them for successful therapeutic and clinical approaches.

Tumor Necrosis Factor Receptor 2 (TNFR2): An Emerging Target in Cancer Therapy

Despite the great success of TNF blockers in the treatment of autoimmune diseases and the identification of TNF as a factor that influences the development of tumors in many ways, the role of TNFR2 in tumor biology and its potential suitability as a therapeutic target in cancer therapy have long been underestimated. This has been fundamentally changed with the identification of TNFR2 as a regulatory T-cell (Treg)-stimulating factor and the general clinical breakthrough of immunotherapeutic approaches. However, considering TNFR2 as a sole immunosuppressive factor in the tumor microenvironment does not go far enough. TNFR2 can also co-stimulate CD8⁺ T-cells, sensitize some immune and tumor cells to the cytotoxic effects of TNFR1 and/or acts as an oncogene. In view of the wide range of cancer-associated TNFR2 activities, it is not surprising that both antagonists and agonists of TNFR2 are considered for tumor therapy and have indeed shown overwhelming anti-tumor activity in preclinical studies. Based on a brief summary of TNFR2 signaling and the immunoregulatory functions of TNFR2, we discuss here the main preclinical findings and insights gained with TNFR2 agonists and antagonists. In particular, we address the question of which TNFR2-associated molecular and cellular mechanisms underlie the observed anti-tumoral activities of TNFR2 agonists and antagonists.

Receptor Oligomerization and Its Relevance for Signaling by Receptors of the Tumor Necrosis Factor Receptor Superfamily

With the exception of a few signaling incompetent decoy receptors, the receptors of the tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily (TNFRSF) are signaling competent and engage in signaling pathways resulting in inflammation, proliferation, differentiation, and cell migration and also in cell death induction. TNFRSF receptors (TNFRs) become activated by ligands of the TNF superfamily (TNFSF). TNFSF ligands (TNFLs) occur as trimeric type II transmembrane proteins but often also as soluble ligand trimers released from the membrane-bound form by proteolysis. The signaling competent TNFRs are efficiently activated by the membrane-bound TNFLs. The latter recruit three TNFR molecules, but there is growing evidence that this is not sufficient to trigger all aspects of TNFR signaling; rather, the formed trimeric TNFL–TNFR complexes have to cluster secondarily in the cell-to-cell contact zone for full TNFR activation. With respect to their response to soluble ligand trimers, the signaling competent TNFRs can be subdivided into two groups. TNFRs of one group, designated as category I TNFRs, are robustly activated by soluble ligand trimers. The receptors of a second group (category II TNFRs), however, failed to become properly activated by soluble ligand trimers despite high affinity binding. The limited responsiveness of category II TNFRs to soluble TNFLs can be overcome by physical linkage of two or more soluble ligand trimers or, alternatively, by anchoring the soluble ligand molecules to the cell surface or extracellular matrix. This suggests that category II TNFRs have a limited ability to promote clustering of trimeric TNFL–TNFR complexes outside the context of cell–cell contacts. In this review, we will focus on three aspects on the relevance of receptor oligomerization for TNFR signaling: (i) the structural factors which promote clustering of free and liganded TNFRs, (ii) the signaling pathway specificity of the receptor oligomerization requirement, and (iii) the consequences for the design and development of TNFR agonists.