Skip to content

Now that I have the model details and supporting information, I'll conduct a thorough review of GO-CAM model gomodel:66187e4700002881 titled "IFNA1-CR2 role in B-cell ISGs induction (Human)".

Review of GO-CAM Model 66187e4700002881: IFNA1-CR2 role in B-cell ISGs induction (Human)

Model Overview

This GO-CAM model describes the interaction between Interferon alpha-1 (IFNA1) and Complement receptor type 2 (CR2) in the induction of interferon-stimulated genes (ISGs) in human B-cells. The model outlines the signaling pathway from IFNA1 binding to CR2, which then activates downstream effectors (EIF2AK2/PKR and MX1) in the antiviral innate immune response.

Model Structure and Components

The model consists of 4 main activity units:

  1. IFNA1 (P01562) with cytokine activity (GO:0005125) in the extracellular space
  2. CR2 (P20023) with transmembrane signaling receptor activity (GO:0004888) in the plasma membrane
  3. MX1 (P20591) with GTPase activity (GO:0003924) in the cytoplasm
  4. EIF2AK2/PKR (P19525) with kinase activity (GO:0016301) in the cytoplasm

The model establishes causal connections using RO:0002407 (provides input for) from CR2 to both MX1 and EIF2AK2, and RO:0002629 (directly positively regulates) from IFNA1 to CR2.

All activities are part of the type I interferon-mediated signaling pathway (GO:0060337).

Key Evidence Assessment

The model cites several PMIDs as evidence, primarily: - PMID:1849076 (Delcayre et al., 1991) - Documents CR2 as an interferon alpha receptor - PMID:30936491 (Review on interferon signaling) - PMID:21859714 (Interaction of MX1 with cellular RNA helicases) - PMID:21123651 (Phosphorylation of NFAR proteins by PKR) - PMID:22948139 (Role of PKR in antiviral immune response) - PMID:25930096 (MX1 role in antiviral innate immune response)

Strengths of the Model

  1. The model accurately represents a non-canonical interferon signaling pathway through CR2 (not the typical IFNAR1/2 complex), which is supported by literature.
  2. The molecular activities are correctly annotated with appropriate GO terms.
  3. The cellular locations are appropriate for each protein (extracellular for IFNA1, plasma membrane for CR2, cytoplasm for MX1 and EIF2AK2).
  4. The causal relationships are consistent with the biological process of type I interferon signaling.
  5. The evidence provided (PMIDs) supports the interactions represented in the model.

Areas for Improvement

  1. Missing host cell receptor annotation: According to the GO-CAM signaling receptor activity annotation guidelines, when a ligand binds to a receptor, the relationship should be "has input" from the ligand to the receptor, but this is not included in the model. Currently, IFNA1 directly positively regulates CR2, which is correct, but the input relationship is missing.

  2. Receptor target specification: For the CR2 receptor, the guideline states that the receptor's input should be the effector protein it regulates, but the model does not specify CR2's direct input. Instead, it shows CR2 providing input for both downstream effectors (MX1 and EIF2AK2) which would benefit from additional mechanistic clarification.

  3. Limited ISG representation: Despite the title mentioning "ISGs induction," the model only includes two ISGs (MX1 and EIF2AK2/PKR). The model would benefit from including additional relevant ISGs or at least mentioning the broader ISG induction process.

  4. Missing molecular mechanisms: The model doesn't detail the precise molecular mechanisms of how CR2 activation leads to MX1 and EIF2AK2 activation. Additional intermediate steps in this signaling pathway would strengthen the model.

  5. Evidence updates: While PMID:1849076 is a solid foundation for the IFNA1-CR2 interaction, it's from 1991. Adding more recent evidence for this interaction would strengthen the model.

Recommendations for Improvement

  1. Add an "has input" relationship from IFNA1 to CR2 to properly annotate the ligand-receptor interaction according to guidelines.

  2. Consider adding the specific downstream targets of CR2 activation with appropriate evidence.

  3. Expand the model to include additional ISGs and/or the broader mechanisms of ISG induction.

  4. Add intermediate steps in the signaling pathway between CR2 and the effector proteins MX1 and EIF2AK2.

  5. Include more recent evidence for the IFNA1-CR2 interaction if available in the literature.

  6. Consider adding information on how this non-canonical signaling pathway integrates with the canonical type I interferon signaling through IFNAR1/2 complex.

Conclusion

The model gomodel:66187e4700002881 provides a valid representation of the IFNA1-CR2 interaction in B-cell ISG induction, supported by evidence from the literature. The causal relationships and GO annotations are appropriate, though the model could be enhanced by adding more detailed molecular mechanisms and by adhering more strictly to the signaling receptor activity annotation guidelines. With these improvements, this model would provide a more comprehensive representation of this non-canonical interferon signaling pathway in human B-cells.