Viral manipulation of the cellular sumoylation machinery.

Viruses exploit various cellular processes for their own benefit, including counteracting anti-viral responses and regulating viral replication and propagation. In the past 20 years, protein sumoylation has emerged as an important post-translational modification that is manipulated by viruses to modulate anti-viral responses, viral replication, and viral pathogenesis. The process of sumoylation is a multi-step cascade where a small ubiquitin-like modifier (SUMO) is covalently attached to a conserved ΨKxD/E motif within a target protein, altering the function of the modified protein. Here we review how viruses manipulate the cellular machinery at each step of the sumoylation process to favor viral survival and pathogenesis.

Effects of targeting sumoylation processes during latent and induced Epstein-Barr virus infections using the small molecule inhibitor ML-792.

As the second leading cause of death in the United States, cancer has a considerable impact on society, and one cellular process that is commonly dysregulated in many cancers is the post-translational modification of proteins by the Small Ubiquitin-like Modifier (SUMO; sumoylation). We documented that sumoylation processes are up-regulated in lymphoma tissues in the presence of Latent Membrane Protein-1 (LMP1), the principal oncoprotein of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV). LMP1-mediated dysregulation of cellular sumoylation processes contributes to oncogenesis, modulates innate immune responses, and aids the maintenance of viral latency. Manipulation of protein sumoylation has been proposed for anti-cancer and anti-viral therapies; however, known inhibitors of sumoylation do not only target sumoylation processes. Recently, a specific and selective small-molecule inhibitor of sumoylation (ML-792) was identified; however, nothing is known about the effect of ML-792 on LMP1-mediated dysregulation of cellular sumoylation or the EBV life-cycle. We hypothesized that ML-792 modulates viral replication and the oncogenic potential of EBV LMP1 by inhibiting protein sumoylation. Results showed that ML-792 inhibited sumoylation processes in multiple EBV-positive B cell lines and EBV-positive nasopharyngeal carcinoma cell lines but not in their EBV-negative counterparts. Focusing on its effect on B cells, ML-792 inhibited B-cell growth and promoted cell death at very low doses. ML-792 also modulated LMP1-induced cell migration and cell adhesion, which suggests the abrogation of the oncogenic potential of LMP1. Finally, while higher concentrations of ML-792 were sufficient to induce low levels EBV spontaneous reactivation, they decreased the production of new infectious virus following an induced reactivation and the infection of new cells, suggesting that ML-792 has anti-viral potential. Together, these findings suggest that ML-792 may be a potential therapeutic drug to treat EBV-associated lymphoid malignancies by targeting oncogenesis and the EBV life-cycle.

Using glycyrrhizic acid to target sumoylation processes during Epstein-Barr virus latency.

Cellular sumoylation processes are proposed targets for anti-viral and anti-cancer therapies. We reported that Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) latent membrane protein 1 (LMP1) dysregulates cellular sumoylation processes, contributing to its oncogenic potential in EBV-associated malignancies. Ginkgolic acid and anacardic acid, known inhibitors of sumoylation, inhibit LMP1-induced protein sumoylation; however, both drugs have adverse effects in hosts. Here we test the effects of glycyrrhizic acid, a medicinal botanical extract with anti-inflammatory, anti-carcinogenic, and anti-viral properties, on cellular sumoylation processes. While glycyrrhizic acid is known to inhibit EBV penetration, its affect on cellular sumoylation processes remains to be documented. We hypothesized that glycyrrhizic acid inhibits cellular sumoylation processes and may be a viable treatment for Epstein-Barr virus-associated malignancies. Results showed that glycyrrhizic acid inhibited sumoylation processes (without affecting ubiquitination processes), limited cell growth, and induced apoptosis in multiple cell lines. Similar to ginkgolic acid; glycyrrhizic acid targeted the first step of the sumoylation process and resulted in low levels of spontaneous EBV reactivation. Glycyrrhizic acid did not affect induced reactivation of the virus, but the presence of the extract did reduce the ability of the produced virus to infect additional cells. Therefore, we propose that glycyrrhizic acid may be a potential therapeutic drug to augment the treatment of EBV-associated lymphoid malignancies.

The Epstein-Barr Virus Oncoprotein, LMP1, Regulates the Function of SENP2, a SUMO-protease.

Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) latent membrane protein-1 (LMP1) activates numerous signal transduction pathways using its C-terminal activating regions. We reported that LMP1 increased global levels of sumoylated proteins, which aided the oncogenic nature of LMP1. Because increased protein sumoylation is detected in numerous cancers, we wanted to elucidate additional mechanisms by which LMP1 modulates the sumoylation machinery. Results indicated that SUMO-protease activity decreased in a LMP1-dependent manner, so we hypothesized that LMP1 inhibits SUMO-protease activity, resulting in reduced de-sumoylation of cellular proteins, which contributes to the detected accumulation of sumoylated proteins in EBV-positive lymphomas. Focusing on SENP2, findings revealed that LMP1 expression corresponded with increased sumoylation of SENP2 at K48 and K447 in a CTAR-dependent manner. Interestingly, independent of LMP1-induced sumoylation of SENP2, LMP1 also decreased SENP2 activity, decreased SENP2 turnover, and altered the localization of SENP2, which led us to investigate if LMP1 regulated the biology of SENP2 by a different post-translational modification, specifically ubiquitination. Data showed that expression of LMP1 inhibited the ubiquitination of SENP2, and inhibition of ubiquitination was sufficient to mimic LMP1-induced changes in SENP2 activity and trafficking. Together, these findings suggest that LMP1 modulates different post-translational modifications of SENP2 in order to modulate its biology and identify a third member of the sumoylation machinery that is manipulated by LMP1 during latent EBV infections, which can affect oncogenesis.

Mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation in autosomal dominant optic atrophy.

BACKGROUND: Autosomal dominant optic atrophy (ADOA), a form of progressive bilateral blindness due to loss of retinal ganglion cells and optic nerve deterioration, arises predominantly from mutations in the nuclear gene for the mitochondrial GTPase, OPA1. OPA1 localizes to mitochondrial cristae in the inner membrane where electron transport chain complexes are enriched. While OPA1 has been characterized for its role in mitochondrial cristae structure and organelle fusion, possible effects of OPA1 on mitochondrial function have not been determined. RESULTS: Mitochondria from six ADOA patients bearing OPA1 mutations and ten ADOA patients with unidentified gene mutations were studied for respiratory capacity and electron transport complex function. Results suggest that the nuclear DNA mutations that give rise to ADOA in our patient population do not alter mitochondrial electron transport. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the pathophysiology of ADOA likely stems from the role of OPA1 in mitochondrial structure or fusion and not from OPA1 support of oxidative phosphorylation.

OPA1 mutations and mitochondrial DNA haplotypes in autosomal dominant optic atrophy.

PURPOSE: Autosomal dominant optic atrophy is a form of blindness, due in part to mutations affecting the mitochondrial-targeted OPA1 gene product. Both OPA1-positive and OPA1-negative families exhibit variable expressivity and incomplete penetrance. The purpose of this study was therefore to determine if the background mtDNA genotype acts as a genetic modifier for the expression of this disease. METHODS: To find novel pathogenic OPA1 mutations, we performed complete OPA1 gene exon sequencing in 30 patients. To assess the possibility that mitochondrial DNA haplotype acts as a genetic modifier, we determined the mitochondrial DNA haplotype in 29 Caucasian OPA1-positive and OPA1-negative patients. Deviations in haplotype distribution between patient and control groups were determined by statistical means. RESULTS: Seven new pathogenic OPA1 mutations were found. Most were detected in the mitochondrial targeting N-terminus or in the coiled-coil domain at the C-terminus. Mitochondrial DNA haplotype analysis indicated that the European haplogroup distribution was different between Caucasian patients and controls. Further, haplogroup J was three-fold over-represented in OPA1-negative patients. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our results support haploinsufficiency as a genetic mechanism in OPA1-positive cases and also suggest that mtDNA genetic background may influence disease expression in a subset of cases.