Strain-Specific Behavior of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Interruption of Autophagy Pathway in Human Alveolar Type II Epithelial A549 Cells
A549 cells
Autophagy
MicroRNA
Mycobacterium tuberculosis
Journal
Iranian biomedical journal
ISSN: 2008-823X
Titre abrégé: Iran Biomed J
Pays: Iran
ID NLM: 9814853
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 07 2022
01 07 2022
Historique:
aheadofprint:
24
08
2022
entrez:
24
8
2022
pubmed:
25
8
2022
medline:
1
9
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Autophagy induction has been shown to differ in magnitude depending on the mycobacterial species. However, few studies have investigated the specific autophagic capacity of different Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) strains in alveolar epithelial cells (ATs). This study aimed to elucidate the host autophagic response to different Mtb strains in ATs responsible for TB in the capital of Iran, Tehran. A549 cells were infected with three different Mtb clinical isolates (Beijing, NEW1, and CAS1/Delhi) and the reference strain H37Rv. Following RNA extraction, the expression of eight ATG genes, four mycobacterial genes, and three miRNAs was evaluated using quantitative RT-PCR. The results revealed that all four strains influenced the autophagy pathway in various ways at different magnitudes. The Beijing and H37Rv strains could inhibit autophagosome formation, whereas the CAS and NEW1 strains induced autophagosome formation. The expression of genes involved in the fusion of autophagosomes to lysosomes (LAMP1) indicated that all the studied strains impaired the autophagolysosomal fusion; this result is not unexpected as Mtb can block the autophagolysomal fusion. In addition, the Beijing and H37RV strains prevented the formation of autophagic vacuoles, besides mycobacterial targeting of lysosomes and protease activity. This preliminary study improved our understanding of how Mtb manages to overcome the host immune system, such as autophagy, and evaluated the genes used by specific strains during this process. Further studies with a large number of Mtb strains, encompassing the other main Mtb lineages, are inevitable.
Sections du résumé
Background
Autophagy induction has been shown to differ in magnitude depending on the mycobacterial species. However, few studies have investigated the specific autophagic capacity of different Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Mtb) strains in alveolar epithelial cells (ATs). This study aimed to elucidate the host autophagic response to different Mtb strains in ATs responsible for TB in the capital of Iran, Tehran.
Methods
A549 cells were infected with three different Mtb clinical isolates (Beijing, NEW1, and CAS1/Delhi) and the reference strain H37Rv. Following RNA extraction, the expression of eight ATG genes, four mycobacterial genes, and three miRNAs was evaluated using quantitative RT-PCR.
Results
The results revealed that all four strains influenced the autophagy pathway in various ways at different magnitudes. The Beijing and H37Rv strains could inhibit autophagosome formation, whereas the CAS and NEW1 strains induced autophagosome formation. The expression of genes involved in the fusion of autophagosomes to lysosomes (LAMP1) indicated that all the studied strains impaired the autophagolysosomal fusion; this result is not unexpected as Mtb can block the autophagolysomal fusion. In addition, the Beijing and H37RV strains prevented the formation of autophagic vacuoles, besides mycobacterial targeting of lysosomes and protease activity.
Conclusion
This preliminary study improved our understanding of how Mtb manages to overcome the host immune system, such as autophagy, and evaluated the genes used by specific strains during this process. Further studies with a large number of Mtb strains, encompassing the other main Mtb lineages, are inevitable.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36000264
doi: 10.52547/ibj.3586
pmc: PMC9432471
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
313-23Références
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2019 Mar;132:46-52
pubmed: 30513341
Respir Res. 2001;2(1):33-46
pubmed: 11686863
Cell. 2010 Mar 5;140(5):731-43
pubmed: 20211141
PLoS Pathog. 2010 Dec 16;6(12):e1001230
pubmed: 21187903
Infect Immun. 2013 Jan;81(1):381-9
pubmed: 23147039
Int Rev Cell Mol Biol. 2008;266:207-47
pubmed: 18544495
PLoS One. 2010 Apr 02;5(4):e9996
pubmed: 20368806
Front Microbiol. 2018 Mar 29;9:602
pubmed: 29651283
Curr Opin Immunol. 2011 Feb;23(1):65-70
pubmed: 21071195
Sci Rep. 2021 Feb 22;11(1):4342
pubmed: 33619301
Sci Rep. 2019 Nov 29;9(1):17946
pubmed: 31784605
Mucosal Immunol. 2019 May;12(3):795-804
pubmed: 30846830
Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2018 Sep;19(9):579-593
pubmed: 30006559
Cell Microbiol. 2017 Jan;19(1):
pubmed: 27794209
Sci Rep. 2015 Nov 06;5:16320
pubmed: 26541268
EMBO J. 2007 Jan 24;26(2):313-24
pubmed: 17245426
Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2013 Mar 8;432(2):308-13
pubmed: 23396060
Innate Immun. 2015 Oct;21(7):746-58
pubmed: 26160686
Chemotherapy. 2018;63(3):172-180
pubmed: 30032143
Tuberculosis (Edinb). 2016 Mar;97:73-85
pubmed: 26980499
Microorganisms. 2020 Dec 23;9(1):
pubmed: 33374544
Genes Dev. 2007 Nov 15;21(22):2861-73
pubmed: 18006683
Trends Cell Biol. 2003 Mar;13(3):137-45
pubmed: 12628346
Int Rev Immunol. 2017 Sep 3;36(5):271-286
pubmed: 28976784
Biomed Res Int. 2019 May 8;2019:1484152
pubmed: 31205933
PLoS Pathog. 2016 Aug 08;12(8):e1005809
pubmed: 27500737
Oncol Lett. 2019 Feb;17(2):2237-2243
pubmed: 30675289
Tuberculosis (Edinb). 2012 Sep;92(5):388-96
pubmed: 22683183
Int J Biol Sci. 2021 Jan 1;17(1):134-150
pubmed: 33390839
DNA Cell Biol. 2012 Feb;31(2):171-9
pubmed: 21740189
Age (Dordr). 2013 Feb;35(1):11-22
pubmed: 22081425
Cell Death Dis. 2018 May 24;9(6):624
pubmed: 29795378
Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2018 Jun 4;2018:7565076
pubmed: 30046303
Microbiology (Reading). 2007 Feb;153(Pt 2):529-540
pubmed: 17259625
J Immunol. 2007 Jan 1;178(1):463-73
pubmed: 17182585
J Clin Invest. 2005 Oct;115(10):2679-88
pubmed: 16200202
J Cell Physiol. 2019 Apr;234(4):4739-4753
pubmed: 30192006
Cell Res. 2014 Jan;24(1):58-68
pubmed: 24296784