A Quantitative Modular Modeling Approach Reveals the Effects of Different A20 Feedback Implementations for the NF-kB Signaling Dynamics.

A20 IKK regulation NF-κB signaling interlocked feedback loops quantitative modeling regulation response time signaling dynamics

Journal

Frontiers in physiology
ISSN: 1664-042X
Titre abrégé: Front Physiol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101549006

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2020
Historique:
received: 30 04 2020
accepted: 02 07 2020
entrez: 28 8 2020
pubmed: 28 8 2020
medline: 28 8 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Signaling pathways involve complex molecular interactions and are controled by non-linear regulatory mechanisms. If details of regulatory mechanisms are not fully elucidated, they can be implemented by different, equally reasonable mathematical representations in computational models. The study presented here focusses on NF-κB signaling, which is regulated by negative feedbacks via IκBα and A20. A20 inhibits NF-κB activation indirectly through interference with proteins that transduce the signal from the TNF receptor complex to activate the IκB kinase (IKK) complex. A number of pathway models has been developed implementing the A20 effect in different ways. We here focus on the question how different A20 feedback implementations impact the dynamics of NF-κB. To this end, we develop a modular modeling approach that allows combining previously published A20 modules with a common pathway core module. The resulting models are fitted to a published comprehensive experimental data set and therefore show quantitatively comparable NF-κB dynamics. Based on defined measures for the initial and long-term behavior we analyze the effects of a wide range of changes in the A20 feedback strength, the IκBα feedback strength and the TNFα stimulation strength on NF-κB dynamics. This shows similarities between the models but also model-specific differences. In particular, the A20 feedback strength and the TNFα stimulation strength affect initial and long-term NF-κB concentrations differently in the analyzed models. We validated our model predictions experimentally by varying TNFα concentrations applied to HeLa cells. These time course data indicate that only one of the A20 feedback models appropriately describes the impact of A20 on the NF-κB dynamics in this cell type.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32848849
doi: 10.3389/fphys.2020.00896
pmc: PMC7402004
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

896

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 Mothes, Ipenberg, Arslan, Benary, Scheidereit and Wolf.

Références

Cell Syst. 2017 Nov 22;5(5):460-470.e5
pubmed: 29102361
Cell. 1998 Dec 11;95(6):759-70
pubmed: 9865694
Immunol Rev. 2012 Mar;246(1):221-38
pubmed: 22435558
Mol Cell. 2011 Nov 18;44(4):559-71
pubmed: 22099304
PLoS Comput Biol. 2016 Dec 27;12(12):e1005298
pubmed: 28027301
Sci Rep. 2017 Jan 03;7:38244
pubmed: 28045041
Biophys J. 1999 Jul;77(1):23-36
pubmed: 10388737
EMBO Rep. 2014 Jan;15(1):46-61
pubmed: 24375677
Science. 2000 Sep 29;289(5488):2350-4
pubmed: 11009421
J R Soc Interface. 2012 Aug 7;9(73):1998-2010
pubmed: 22417908
Mol Syst Biol. 2008;4:192
pubmed: 18463616
Genes Dev. 2012 Feb 1;26(3):203-34
pubmed: 22302935
Bioessays. 2015 Apr;37(4):452-62
pubmed: 25640005
BMC Bioinformatics. 2007 Oct 09;8:376
pubmed: 17925009
Science. 2002 Nov 8;298(5596):1241-5
pubmed: 12424381
Nature. 2015 Dec 17;528(7582):370-5
pubmed: 26649818
Nat Rev Cancer. 2012 Jan 19;12(2):121-32
pubmed: 22257950
Genes Dev. 2008 Aug 1;22(15):2093-101
pubmed: 18676814
Cell Death Differ. 2017 Jul;24(7):1172-1183
pubmed: 28362430
FEBS J. 2015 Mar;282(6):1080-96
pubmed: 25601154
Science. 2009 Apr 10;324(5924):242-6
pubmed: 19359585
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 May 29;115(22):E5243-E5249
pubmed: 29760065
Cell Rep. 2014 Dec 11;9(5):1756-1769
pubmed: 25482563
J R Soc Interface. 2015 Sep 6;12(110):0262
pubmed: 26311312
PLoS One. 2013 Sep 30;8(9):e74335
pubmed: 24098642
Cardiovasc Toxicol. 2007;7(4):215-34
pubmed: 17943462
Mol Syst Biol. 2011 May 10;7:488
pubmed: 21556066
Nat Commun. 2015 Jul 14;6:7367
pubmed: 26170170
PLoS Comput Biol. 2013;9(6):e1003112
pubmed: 23825938
EMBO Rep. 2014 Jul;15(7):775-83
pubmed: 24878851
Mol Cell. 2009 Nov 13;36(3):365-78
pubmed: 19917246
EMBO J. 2017 Dec 1;36(23):3501-3516
pubmed: 29061763
J Theor Biol. 2014 Apr 21;347:44-53
pubmed: 24447586
J Theor Biol. 2004 May 21;228(2):195-215
pubmed: 15094015
Biomedicines. 2019 May 27;7(2):
pubmed: 31137887
Nat Rev Cancer. 2010 May;10(5):332-41
pubmed: 20383180

Auteurs

Janina Mothes (J)

Mathematical Modelling of Cellular Processes, Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany.

Inbal Ipenberg (I)

Signal Transduction in Tumor Cells, Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany.

Seda Çöl Arslan (SÇ)

Signal Transduction in Tumor Cells, Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany.

Uwe Benary (U)

Mathematical Modelling of Cellular Processes, Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany.

Claus Scheidereit (C)

Signal Transduction in Tumor Cells, Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany.

Jana Wolf (J)

Mathematical Modelling of Cellular Processes, Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany.

Classifications MeSH