Lucas D M, Lokuta M A, McDowell M A, Doan J E, Paulnock D M
Department of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, University of Wisconsin Medical School, Madison 53706, USA.
J Immunol. 1998 May 1;160(9):4337-42.
We previously demonstrated that the macrophage cell lines RAW 264.7 and WEHI-3 exhibit distinct patterns of gene expression in response to IFN-gamma. This difference is controlled at the transcriptional level and results from a specific inability of the less mature WEHI-3 cells to utilize either the IFN-stimulated response element or the gamma-activated sequence DNA regulatory element in response to stimulation with IFN-gamma, while other aspects of IFN-gamma gene induction remain intact. In the work described here, we examined the components of the IFN-gamma signal transduction pathway in RAW 264.7 and WEHI-3 cells to determine whether differences in pathway components or activity exist in WEHI-3 cells that could give rise to this difference in transcriptional response. Reverse transcriptase-PCR (RT-PCR) and flow cytometric analyses indicated that the levels of IFN-gamma receptor mRNA accumulation and protein expression are comparable for RAW 264.7 and WEHI-3 cells. RT-PCR and immunoblot analyses revealed that the principal components of this signaling pathway, including JAK1, JAK2, and STAT1, are present in both RAW 264.7 and WEHI-3 cells. However, analysis of STAT1 DNA-binding activity by electrophoretic mobility shift assay and of STAT1 phosphorylation by immunoblot revealed that this DNA-binding factor is active in RAW 264.7, but not in WEHI-3, cells after IFN-gamma stimulation. These results demonstrate that the components of the IFN-gamma signal transduction pathway are intact in WEHI-3 cells, but stimulation of these cells by IFN-gamma does not result in STAT1 activation.
