Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Newest Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Methods & Resources
    • Archive
    • Subjects
  • Collections
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Guidelines
    • License, Copyright, Fee
    • FAQ
    • Why Submit
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editors & Staff
    • Board Members
    • Licensing and Reuse
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Privacy Policy
    • Advertise
    • Contact Us
    • LSA LLC
  • Alerts
  • Other Publications
    • EMBO Press
    • The EMBO Journal
    • EMBO reports
    • EMBO Molecular Medicine
    • Molecular Systems Biology
    • Rockefeller University Press
    • Journal of Cell Biology
    • Journal of Experimental Medicine
    • Journal of General Physiology
    • Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
    • Genes & Development
    • Genome Research

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Life Science Alliance
  • Other Publications
    • EMBO Press
    • The EMBO Journal
    • EMBO reports
    • EMBO Molecular Medicine
    • Molecular Systems Biology
    • Rockefeller University Press
    • Journal of Cell Biology
    • Journal of Experimental Medicine
    • Journal of General Physiology
    • Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
    • Genes & Development
    • Genome Research
  • My alerts
Life Science Alliance

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Newest Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Methods & Resources
    • Archive
    • Subjects
  • Collections
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Guidelines
    • License, Copyright, Fee
    • FAQ
    • Why Submit
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editors & Staff
    • Board Members
    • Licensing and Reuse
    • Reviewer Guidelines
    • Privacy Policy
    • Advertise
    • Contact Us
    • LSA LLC
  • Alerts
  • Follow lsa Template on Twitter
Research Article
Transparent Process
Open Access

Reciprocal regulation of STING and TCR signaling by mTORC1 for T-cell activation and function

Takayuki Imanishi  Correspondence email, Midori Unno, Wakana Kobayashi, Natsumi Yoneda, Satoshi Matsuda, Kazutaka Ikeda, Takayuki Hoshii, Atsushi Hirao, Kensuke Miyake, Glen N Barber, Makoto Arita, Ken J Ishii, Shizuo Akira, View ORCID ProfileTakashi Saito  Correspondence email
Takayuki Imanishi
1Laboratory for Cell Signaling, RIKEN Center for Integrative Medical Sciences, Yokohama, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: takayuki.imanishi@riken.jp
Midori Unno
1Laboratory for Cell Signaling, RIKEN Center for Integrative Medical Sciences, Yokohama, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Wakana Kobayashi
1Laboratory for Cell Signaling, RIKEN Center for Integrative Medical Sciences, Yokohama, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Natsumi Yoneda
1Laboratory for Cell Signaling, RIKEN Center for Integrative Medical Sciences, Yokohama, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Satoshi Matsuda
2Department of Cell Signaling, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Kansai Medical University, Hirakata, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kazutaka Ikeda
3Laboratory for Metabolomics, RIKEN Center for Integrative Medical Sciences, Yokohama, Japan
4Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED)-PRIME, Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development, Tokyo, Japan
5Graduate School of Medical Life Science, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Takayuki Hoshii
6Division of Molecular Genetics, Cancer Research Institute, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Atsushi Hirao
6Division of Molecular Genetics, Cancer Research Institute, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kensuke Miyake
7Division of Innate Immunity, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Institute of Medical Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Glen N Barber
8Department of Cell Biology and the Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Makoto Arita
3Laboratory for Metabolomics, RIKEN Center for Integrative Medical Sciences, Yokohama, Japan
5Graduate School of Medical Life Science, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan
9Division of Physiological Chemistry and Metabolism, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Keio University, Tokyo, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ken J Ishii
10Laboratory of Vaccine Science, World Premier International Research Center Initiative (WPI) Immunology Frontier Research Center, Osaka University, Suita, Japan
11Laboratory of Adjuvant Innovation, National Institutes of Biomedical Innovation, Health and Nutrition, Osaka, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Shizuo Akira
12Laboratory of Host Defense, WPI Immunology Frontier Research Center, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Takashi Saito
1Laboratory for Cell Signaling, RIKEN Center for Integrative Medical Sciences, Yokohama, Japan
13Laboratory for Cell Signaling, WPI Immunology Frontier Research Center, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Takashi Saito
  • For correspondence: takashi.saito@riken.jp
Published 25 January 2019. DOI: 10.26508/lsa.201800282
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • Metrics
  • Reviewer Comments
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure S1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S1. T cell–intrinsic STING inhibits cell cycle progression of T cells.

    (A) Expression of STING in BMDCs and CD4+ T cells by Western blot. (B) Naive CD8+ T cells from Sting+/+ or Sting−/− mice were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without graded amounts of cGAMP for 48 h, and cell growth was assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay. (C) Naive CD4+ T cells from Sting+/− or Sting−/− OT-II Tg mice were cocultured with irradiated T cell–depleted splenocytes from C57BL/6 mice as APCs, together with OVA323–339 peptide (10 μM) in the presence or absence of graded amounts of cGAMP, and cell growth was assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay. (D) Naive CD4+ T cells were pretreated with (open column) or without (closed column) Z-VAD and stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP or DMXAA for 48 h, and cell growth was assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay. (E) Naive CD4+ T cells from Rip3+/+ (closed column) or Rip3−/− (open column) mice were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP or DMXAA for 48 h, and cell growth was assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay. (F) qPCR analysis of the expression of cell cycle–related genes in CD4+ T cells from Sting+/− (closed column) or Sting−/− (open column) mice upon stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs in the presence or absence of cGAMP (30 μg/ml) for 24 h. (G) RNA-seq data for the expression of cell cycle–related genes in CD4+ T cells stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h. Data are the mean from duplicate (B–E) or triplicate (F) ± SD. Data are representative of at least three independent experiments. (A—F) *P < 0.05, t test (compared with WT cells treated with cGAMP). (E) *P < 0.05, t test (compared with control cells treated with etoposide).

  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1. STING stimulation in T cells inhibits cell cycle progression.

    (A, B) FACS-sorted naive CD4+ T cells from Sting+/+ or Sting−/− mice were stimulated with immobilized anti-CD3ε plus anti-CD28 (anti-CD3/CD28) Abs with or without STING ligands cGAMP or DMXAA. Cell growth was assessed after 48 h of stimulation by a WST-8 proliferation assay (A), and cell survival was determined after 18 h of stimulation by Propidium iodide (PI) and Annexin V staining (B). (C) Naive CD4+ T cells from Sting+/+ or Sting−/− mice were stimulated with cGAMP or DMXAA for 18 h, and cell survival was determined by PI and Annexin V staining. (D, E) Naive CD4+ T cells were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 48 h, and cell division was determined by a CFSE-labeling assay (D) and cell cycle was assessed by PI staining (E). (F) Western blot analysis for protein expression of cell cycle–related genes in CD4+ T cells upon stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h. Data are the mean from duplicate (A–C) ± SD. Data are representative of at least three independent experiments. (A–F) *P < 0.05, t test (compared with WT cells treated with indicated ligands).

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2. STING activation leads to the inhibition of the mTORC1 pathway.

    (A, B) Western blot analysis of the indicated phosphorylated proteins in CD4+ T cells from Sting+/+ or Sting−/− mice upon stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h. (C) FACS analysis of indicated surface molecules on CD4+ T cells upon stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h. (D) RNA-seq data of the expression of lipid synthesis–related genes in CD4+ T cells upon stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h. (E) Quantification of total cholesterol ester (upper) and total DAG (lower) in CD4+ T cells upon stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h, assessed by LC-MS. Data are the mean from triplicate ± SD (E). Data are representative of at least three independent experiments (A–C). (E) *P < 0.05, t test (compared with that with anti-CD3/28 alone).

  • Figure S2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S2. STING activation induces inhibition of the mTORC1 pathway.

    (A) Naive CD4+ T cells were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs in the presence or absence of cGAMP for 15 h, and IL-2 production was assessed by ELISA. (B) Naive CD4+ T cells were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs in the presence or absence of exogenously added IL-2 (100 ng/ml) and cGAMP, and cell growth was assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay. (C) Western blot analysis of CD4+ T cells stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs in the presence or absence of cGAMP and IL-2 (100 ng/ml) or anti-IL-2R Ab. (D) Naive CD4+ T cells were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs in the presence or absence of anti-IL-2R Ab or cGAMP, and cell growth was assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay. (E) Western blot analysis for activation of mTOR signaling in CD4+ T cells stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs in the presence or absence of different STING ligands, cGAMP, c-di-AMP, or DMXAA. (F) qPCR analysis for the expression of various genes in CD4+ T cells from Rptor+/+ (closed column) or Rptor-fl/fl (open column) mice stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h. Data are the mean from duplicate (A, B) or triplicate (F) ± SD. Data are representative of at least three independent experiments (A–F).

  • Figure S3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S3. TCR stimulation induces sustained activation of IRF3 upon CDN stimulation to produce type I IFNs.

    (A) RNA-seq data for the expression of IFN-related genes in CD4+ T cells stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h. (B) Naive CD4+ T cells were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without the indicated STING ligands, and IFN-α production at 24 h (upper) and 48 h (lower) after stimulation was assessed by ELISA. N.D., not detected < 6.2 pg/ml. (C) qPCR analysis for the expression of Ifn genes in CD4+ T cells stimulated with or without (ctrl) cGAMP in the presence or absence of anti-CD3/CD28 stimulation for 24 h. (D) Naive CD8+ T cells from Sting+/− (closed column) or Sting−/− (open column) mice were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs and cGAMP for 48 h, and IFN-β production was assessed by ELISA. (E) Naive CD4+ T cells were stimulated with the indicated STING ligands with (open column) or without (closed column) anti-CD3/CD28 stimulation for 48 h, and IFN-λ2/3 production was assessed by ELISA. (F) Naive CD4+ T cells were stimulated with graded doses of anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with (open column) or without (closed column) cGAMP for 48 h, and IFN-α production was assessed by ELISA. (G) Western blot analysis of the expression of the indicated signaling molecules in BMDCs and CD4+ T cells. Data are the mean from duplicate (B, D, E, F) or triplicate (C) ± SD. Data are representative of at least three independent experiments (B–G).

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3. TCR stimulation induces sustained activation of IRF3 upon CDN stimulation to produce type I IFNs.

    (A) Naive CD4+ T cells were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without the indicated STING ligands, and the level of IFN-β produced at 24 h (upper) and 48 h (lower) after stimulation was measured by ELISA. N.D., not detected < 2.0 pg/ml. (B) Western blot analysis of the activation status in CD4+ T cells upon stimulation with cGAMP in the presence or absence of stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs for 5 or 15 h. (C) qPCR analysis of the expression of IFN genes in CD4+ T cells upon stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for the indicated time period. (D) Western blot analysis for IRF3 activation in CD4+ T cells upon stimulation with different STING ligands in the presence or absence of stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs. (E) Naive CD4+ T cells from Irf3+/+ or Irf3−/− mice were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs in the presence or absence of the indicated ligands, and IFN-β production was assessed by ELISA. (F) qPCR analysis of ISG genes in CD4+ T cells from Irf3+/+ or Irf3−/− mice upon stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h. (G, H) Naive CD4+ T cells from Tbk1+/− Tnf−/− or Tbk1−/− Tnf−/− mice were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs, with or without cGAMP, and IFN-β production was assessed by ELISA (G), and phosphorylation of IRF3 was assessed by Western blot analysis (H). (I, J) Naive CD4+ T cells from Ikkε+/+ or Ikkε−/− mice were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP, and IFN-β production was assessed by ELISA (I), and phosphorylation of IRF3 was assessed by Western blot analysis (J). Data are the mean from duplicate (A, E, G, I) or triplicate (C, F) ± SD. Data are representative of at least three independent experiments. (A—J) *P < 0.05, t test (compared with WT cells treated with cGAMP).

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4. Greatly enhanced STING-mediated type I IFN responses in effector/activated T cells.

    (A) Th1 cells or activated CD8+ T cells were stimulated with cGAMP in the presence (IL-2) or absence (unstim) of IL-2 or stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs for 24 h, and IFN-β production was assessed by ELISA. (B) cGAMP was added to the media or introduced by lipofection into BMDCs for 24 h, and IFN-β production was assessed by ELISA. (C, D) Western blot analysis of phosphorylation of IRF3 and TBK1 in Th1 cells (C) or activated CD8+ T cells (D) upon stimulation with cGAMP with or without IL-2 or anti-CD3/CD28 stimulation. Data are the mean from duplicate ± SD (A, B). Data are representative of at least three independent experiments (A—D).

  • Figure S4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S4. Greatly enhanced STING-mediated type I IFN responses in effector/activated T cells.

    (A) Th1 cells or activated CD8+ T cells were stimulated with graded doses of cGAMP alone (closed column) or together with IL-2 (grey column) or anti-CD3/CD28 stimulation (open column) for 24 h, and IFN-α production was assessed by ELISA. (B) Graded doses of cGAMP were added to the media or introduced by lipofection into BMDCs for 24 h, and IFN-α production was assessed by ELISA. (C) B220+ B cells were purified and stimulated with graded doses of cGAMP in the presence or absence of stimulation with anti-IgM or LPS for 48 h, and cell growth (upper) and IFN-β production (lower) were assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay and ELISA, respectively. N.D., not detected < 2.0 pg/ml. (D) qPCR analysis for the expression of Ifn genes in B cells upon stimulation with LPS with or without cGAMP for indicated period. Data are the mean from duplicate (A–C) or triplicate (D) ± SD (A–D). Data are representative of at least three independent experiments. (C) *P < 0.05, t test (compared with that with anti-IgM alone or LPS alone).

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5. Molecular mechanism of STING-mediated inhibition of the mTORC1 pathway.

    (A, D) Naive CD4+ T cells from Ifnar1+/+ or Ifnar1−/− mice (A) or WT, Irf3−/−, or Irf3−/− Irf7−/− mice (D) were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 48 h, and cell growth was assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay. (B, E) Activation of the mTORC1 pathway was analyzed by Western blot in CD4+ T cells from Ifnar1+/+ or Ifnar1−/− mice (B) or Irf3−/− Irf7−/− (DKO) mice (E) upon stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h. (C) Naive CD4+ T cells from Tbk1+/− Tnf−/− or Tbk1−/− Tnf−/− mice (upper) or Ikkε+/+ or Ikkε−/− mice (lower) were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP, and cell growth was assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay. (F) qPCR analysis of various genes in CD4+ T cells from WT (closed bar), Irf3−/− (grey bar), or Irf3−/− Irf7−/− (open bar) mice upon stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h. Data are the mean from duplicate ± SD (A, C, D) or triplicate (F) ± SD. Data are representative of at least three independent experiments (C—F). (A, F) *P < 0.05, t test (compared with WT cells treated with cGAMP). (D) *P < 0.05, t test (compared with WT cells or Irf3-KO cells treated with cGAMP).

  • Figure S5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S5. Molecular mechanism of STING-mediated inhibition of the mTORC1 pathway.

    (A) Naive CD4+ T cells were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs either with rapamycin (open column) or anti-IFNAR1 Ab (grey column) or both rapamycin and anti-IFNAR1 Ab (diagonal line column) with or without (Ctrl, closed column) cGAMP for 48 h, and cell growth was assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay. (B) Naive CD4+ T cells from Irf7+/+ (closed column) or Irf7−/− (open column) mice were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 48 h, and cell growth was assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay. (C) Quantitative analysis of the data in Fig 5E. Data were collected from four independent experiments. (D) FACS analysis of surface expression of indicated molecules and FSC on CD4+ T cells from WT and Irf3/Irf7-DKO mice upon stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h. (E) Naive CD4+ T cells from WT or Irf3-KO mice were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without IFN-β (1 ng/ml) or cGAMP for 48 h, and cell growth was assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay. (F) Naive CD4+ T cells from WT or Irf3/Irf7-DKO mice were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without IFN-β (1 ng/ml) or cGAMP for 48 h, and cell growth was assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay. (G) Western blot analysis for the mTORC1 activation pathway in CD4+ T cells from Irf3+/+ or Irf3−/− mice. (H) Western blot analysis for the ER stress pathways in CD4+ T cells stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs in the presence or absence of cGAMP. Data are the mean from duplicate (A, B, E, F) ± SD. Data are representative of two independent experiments. (A, B, D, E, F, G, H) *P < 0.05, t test (compared with WT cells treated with cGAMP). (F) *P < 0.05, t test (compared with WT cells treated with cGAMP and IFN-β).

  • Figure S6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S6. mTORC1 signaling is required for STING-mediated type I IFN responses.

    (A) Naive CD4+ T cells pretreated with (open column) or without (closed column) rapamycin were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs in the presence or absence of graded doses of cGAMP for 48 h, and cell growth (upper) and IFN-β production (lower) were assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay and ELISA, respectively. (B) qPCR analysis of Ifn-related genes in CD4+ T cells stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs in the presence (open column) or absence (closed column) of rapamycin or cGAMP. (C) Western blot analysis for mTORC1 activation in CD4+ T cells stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs in the presence of PF-4708671 (PF), rapamycin (Rapa), or cGAMP. (D) Western blot analysis for phosphorylation of signaling molecules in CD4+ T cells stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs in the presence or absence of c-di-AMP or cGAMP. (E) qPCR analysis for the expression of IFN-related genes in CD4+ T cells stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 with or without cGAMP for 48 h. (F) Western blot analysis of activation of mTORC1-related molecules in CD4+ T cells with or without Rapamycin pretreatment and upon stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h. (G) Naive CD4+ T cells pretreated with or without rapamycin were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs in the presence or absence of cGAMP (10 μg/ml) for 48 h, and cell growth (upper) and IFN-β production (lower) were assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay and ELISA, respectively. Data are the mean from duplicate (A, G) or triplicate (B, E) ± SD. Data are representative of at least three independent experiments. (A—G) *P < 0.05, t test (compared with control cells treated with or without cGAMP).

  • Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6. mTORC1 signaling is required for STING-mediated type I IFN responses.

    (A) Naive CD4+ T cells from Rptor+/+ (closed bar) or Rptorfl/fl (open bar) mice were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 48 h, and cell growth (upper) and IFN-β production (lower) were assessed by a WST-8 cell proliferation assay and ELISA, respectively. (B) qPCR analysis of ISG genes in CD4+ T cells from Rptor+/+ (closed bar) or Rptorfl/fl (open bar) mice upon stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h. (C) Western blot analysis of activation of IRF3 and mTORC1-related molecules in CD4+ T cells with or without rapamycin pretreatment and upon stimulation with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h (upper). Relative intensity of IRF7 was shown (lower). (D) Naive CD4+ T cells were untreated or pretreated with S6K inhibitor PF-4708671 and stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 48 h, and IFN-β production was assessed by ELISA. N.D., not detected < 2.0 pg/ml. (E) CD4+ T cells were retrovirally transduced with an empty vector (EV) or a 4E-BP1 (T37/46 A/A) construct and stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28 Abs with or without cGAMP for 24 h, and IFN-β production was assessed by ELISA. Data are the mean from duplicate (A, D, E) or triplicate (B) ± SD. Data are representative of at least three independent experiments (C–E). (A, B) *P < 0.05, t test (compared with WT cells treated with cGAMP). (D) *P < 0.05, t test (compared with that with anti-CD3/28 alone). (E) *P < 0.05, t test (compared with control cells treated with cGAMP).

  • Figure S7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure S7. Schematic model of STING pathways to induce growth inhibition and IFN-I responses in T cells.

    Costimulation of STING by cGAMP and TCR induces the growth inhibition by partially blocking the mTORC1 activation and induces the sustained activation of IRF3 and the partial activation of mTORC1, leading to IFN-I production. This IFN-I also induces growth inhibition without affecting mTORC1 signals.

  • Figure 7.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7. T cell–intrinsic STING is critical for antitumor immunity.

    (A, B) T cells from Sting+/− or Sting−/− mice and B220+ cells from WT mice were cotransferred into Rag1-KO mice (Sting+/−, Sting−/−), and the mice were subcutaneously inoculated with 2 × 105 B16 F10 melanoma cells (n = 7 mice per group). On days 8, 10, and 13, the mice were subjected to intratumor injection of cGAMP and then monitored for tumor growth for 17 d (A) and for survival for 40 d (B). (A) *P < 0.05, t test.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1.

    Pathway-enrichment analysis.

    CountP
    Enrichment cluster 1 (score, 3.64)
     Lipid biosynthesis145.1 × 10−8
     Lipid metabolic process208.4 × 10−6
     Lipid metabolism188.9 × 10−6
     Fatty acid desaturase, type 159.4 × 10−6
     Unsaturated fatty acid biosynthetic process53.3 × 10−5
     Stearoyl-CoA 9-desaturase activity43.7 × 10−5
     Fatty acid biosynthesis73.8 × 10−5
     Fatty acid biosynthetic process84.7 × 10−5
     Biosynthesis of unsaturated fatty acid65.1 × 10−5
     Fatty acid metabolism91.0 × 10−4
     Long-chain fatty acid biosynthetic process41.7 × 10−4
     PPAR signaling pathway82.3 × 10−4
     Palmitoyl-CoA 9-desaturase activity39.2 × 10−4
     Monosaturated fatty acid biosynthetic process39.8 × 10−4
    Enrichment cluster 2 (score, 3.42)
     Nucleosome131.1 × 10−8
     Negative regulation of cell proliferation141.5 × 10−3
     Ubl conjugation312.8 × 10−3
    Enrichment cluster 3 (score, 3.31)
     ER341.2 × 10−4
    Enrichment cluster 4 (score, 3.01)
     Sterol biosynthetic process62.2 × 10−5
     Cholesterol biosynthetic process65.2 × 10−5
     Cholesterol biosynthesis57.5 × 10−5
     Steroid biosynthesis67.5 × 10−5
     Cholesterol metabolism64.5 × 10−4
     Sterol metabolism67.8 × 10−4
     Cholesterol metabolic process71.0 × 10−3
     Steroid biosynthetic process61.2 × 10−3
     Steroid metabolism61.7 × 10−3
    Enrichment cluster 4 (score, 2.26)
     Oxidereductase195.3 × 10−4
     Oxidereductase activity196.0 × 10−4
     Oxidation-reduction process193.0 × 10−3
     NADP71.7 × 10−3
    • Pathway-enrichment analysis of gene expression with down-regulation in CD4+ T cells stimulated with anti-CD3/28 plus cGAMP for 24 h as compared with those stimulated with anti-CD3/28 alone. Data were analyzed with DAVID Bioinformatics Resources 6.8 and represent one experiment.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Life Science Alliance.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Reciprocal regulation of STING and TCR signaling by mTORC1 for T-cell activation and function
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Life Science Alliance
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Life Science Alliance web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Critical role of mTOR in STING-mediated responses in T cells
Takayuki Imanishi, Midori Unno, Wakana Kobayashi, Natsumi Yoneda, Satoshi Matsuda, Kazutaka Ikeda, Takayuki Hoshii, Atsushi Hirao, Kensuke Miyake, Glen N Barber, Makoto Arita, Ken J Ishii, Shizuo Akira, Takashi Saito
Life Science Alliance Jan 2019, 2 (1) e201800282; DOI: 10.26508/lsa.201800282

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Critical role of mTOR in STING-mediated responses in T cells
Takayuki Imanishi, Midori Unno, Wakana Kobayashi, Natsumi Yoneda, Satoshi Matsuda, Kazutaka Ikeda, Takayuki Hoshii, Atsushi Hirao, Kensuke Miyake, Glen N Barber, Makoto Arita, Ken J Ishii, Shizuo Akira, Takashi Saito
Life Science Alliance Jan 2019, 2 (1) e201800282; DOI: 10.26508/lsa.201800282
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
Issue Cover

In this Issue

Volume 2, No. 1
February 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • Cover (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Masthead (PDF)
Advertisement

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Materials and Methods
    • Data Availability
    • Acknowledgements
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • Metrics
  • Reviewer Comments
  • PDF

Subjects

  • Immunology

EMBO Press LogoRockefeller University Press LogoCold Spring Harbor Logo

Content

  • Home
  • Newest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Subject Collections

For Authors

  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Guidelines
  • License, copyright, Fee

Other Services

  • Alerts
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feeds

More Information

  • Editors & Staff
  • Reviewer Guidelines
  • Feedback
  • Licensing and Reuse
  • Privacy Policy

ISSN: 2575-1077
© 2022 Life Science Alliance LLC

Life Science Alliance is registered as a trademark in the U.S. Patent and Trade Mark Office and in the European Union Intellectual Property Office.