2015
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms8600
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Phosphorylation status determines the opposing functions of Smad2/Smad3 as STAT3 cofactors in TH17 differentiation

Abstract: Transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) are the pivotal cytokines to induce IL-17-producing CD4+ T helper cells (TH17); yet their signalling network remains largely unknown. Here we show that the highly homologous TGF-β receptor-regulated Smads (R-Smads): Smad2 and Smad3 oppositely modify STAT3-induced transcription of IL-17A and retinoic acid receptor-related orphan nuclear receptor, RORγt encoded by Rorc, by acting as a co-activator and co-repressor of STAT3, respectively. Smad2 linker … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

4
75
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 94 publications
(81 citation statements)
references
References 60 publications
4
75
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The results presented in the present study suggest distinct functions for Runx1 and Runx2 in Th Previous work has uncovered differential requirements for Smad transcription factors in differentiation of TGF-b1-dependent Th cell lineages. Smad2 is a positive regulator of Th9 and Th17 differentiation, whereas Smad3 is a negative regulator of Th17 development (32)(33)(34)54). Smad3 is also a positive regulator of Th9 development, but mechanisms by which Smad2 and Smad3 induce Th9 cells appear to be quite distinct (42,55).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The results presented in the present study suggest distinct functions for Runx1 and Runx2 in Th Previous work has uncovered differential requirements for Smad transcription factors in differentiation of TGF-b1-dependent Th cell lineages. Smad2 is a positive regulator of Th9 and Th17 differentiation, whereas Smad3 is a negative regulator of Th17 development (32)(33)(34)54). Smad3 is also a positive regulator of Th9 development, but mechanisms by which Smad2 and Smad3 induce Th9 cells appear to be quite distinct (42,55).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, unlike their functional cooperation in transcription, the direct physical interaction between SMAD3 and STAT3 usually resulted in antagonizing each other. For instance, SMAD3 could bring PIAS3 to STAT3, which inhibits STAT3 DNA binding (17,27), whereas overexpression of hyperactive STAT3 traps SMAD3 from SMAD3-SMAD4 complex formation (16). It seems that the phosphorylation status of SMAD3 determines whether it inhibits or cooperates with STAT3 in transcription.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Physical interaction between SMAD3 and STAT3 was also reported (16). Moreover, unphosphorylated SMAD3 was also shown to be capable of recruiting PIAS3 (protein inhibitor of activated STAT3) to inhibit STAT3-dependent transcription by blocking DNA binding (17). To reconcile this mixed bag of information in the setting of biphasic activation of the JAK1-STAT3 axis that we observed here, we first examined the physical interaction between STAT3 and SMAD3 in LX-2 cells.…”
Section: Journal Of Biological Chemistry 4305mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…HIES is characterized by recurrent skin abscesses, eczema, pneumonia, high levels of serum IgE, and reduced Th17 differentiation. Nonimmunological manifestations of HIES include a characteristic face, pathologic dentition, scoliosis, bone alterations (fractures with minor trauma), hyperextensible joints, and vascular abnormalities . The disease can be transmitted as an autosomal dominant trait , with full penetrance and variable expressivity .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%