With the extension of life span in recent decades, there is an increasing burden of late-onset neurodegenerative diseases, for which effective treatments are lacking. Neurodegenerative diseases include the widespread Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Parkinson’s disease (PD), the less frequent Huntington’s disease (HD) and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) and also rare early-onset diseases linked to mutations that cause protein aggregation or loss of function in genes that maintain protein homeostasis. The difficulties in applying gene therapy approaches to tackle these diseases is drawing increasing attention to strategies that aim to inhibit cellular toxicity and restore homeostasis by intervening in cellular pathways. These include the unfolded protein response (UPR), activated in response to endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress, a cellular affliction that is shared by these diseases. Special focus is turned to the PKR-like ER kinase (PERK) pathway of the UPR as a target for intervention. However, the complexity of the pathway and its ability to promote cell survival or death, depending on ER stress resolution, has led to some confusion in conflicting studies. Both inhibition and activation of the PERK pathway have been reported to be beneficial in disease models, although there are also some reports where they are counterproductive. Although with the current knowledge a definitive answer cannot be given on whether it is better to activate or to inhibit the pathway, the most encouraging strategies appear to rely on boosting some steps without compromising downstream recovery.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

N-linked glycosylation and sugar chain processing, as well as disulfide bond formation, are among the most common post-translational protein modifications taking place in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). They are essential modifications that are required for membrane and secretory proteins to achieve their correct folding and native structure. Several oxidoreductases responsible for disulfide bond formation, isomerization, and reduction have been shown to form stable, functional complexes with enzymes and chaperones that are involved in the initial addition of an N-glycan and in folding and quality control of the glycoproteins. Some of these oxidoreductases are selenoproteins. Recent studies also implicate glycan machinery–oxidoreductase complexes in the recognition and processing of misfolded glycoproteins and their reduction and targeting to ER-associated degradation. This review focuses on the intriguing cooperation between the glycoprotein-specific cell machineries and ER oxidoreductases, and highlights open questions regarding the functions of many members of this large family.

No abstract

Misfolded proteins and components of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) quality control and ER associated degradation (ERAD) machineries concentrate in the pericentriolar ER-derived quality control compartment (ERQC), suggesting it as a staging ground for ERAD. By tracking the chaperone calreticulin and an established ERAD substrate, asialoglycoprotein receptor H2a, we have now determined that the trafficking to the ERQC is reversible and recycling back to the ER is slower than the movement in the ER periphery. The dynamics suggest vesicular trafficking rather than diffusion. Indeed, using dominant negative mutants of ARF1 and Sar1 or the drugs Brefeldin A and H89, we observed that COPI inhibition causes accumulation in the ERQC and increased retrotranslocation and ERAD, whereas COPII inhibition has the opposite effect. Our results suggest that targeting of misfolded proteins to ERAD involves COPII-dependent transport to the ERQC and that they can be retrieved to the peripheral ER in a COPI-dependent manner.