Эпишаперомно-липидный интерфейс плазматической мембраны как регулятор клеточной стресс-адаптации и терапевтическая мишень при заболеваниях человека

Плазматическая мембрана клетки функционирует не только как структурный барьер, но и как динамическая регуляторная платформа, интегрирующая стрессовые, механические и метаболические сигналы и координирующая внутриклеточные и межклеточные адаптивные реакции. Она обеспечивает пространственную организацию сигнальных комплексов, способствует компартментализации биохимических процессов и формирует условия для быстрой и избирательной перестройки клеточного ответа на изменения микроокружения. В настоящей работе предложена концепция мембранно-ассоциированного эпишаперома, организованного в функциональной связи с липидными микродоменами и формирующего эпишаперомно-липидный интерфейс — структурно и функционально целостную платформу, объединяющую протеостаз, биофизику мембран и адаптивный сигналинг.

Мембранные белки теплового шока HSP70 и HSP90 координируют внутриклеточные сигнальные каскады, выступая платформами для сборки и стабилизации мультибелковых комплексов, включая рецепторы и киназы. Они поддерживают активность сигнальных путей и регулируют межклеточную коммуникацию через экзосомы, внеклеточные везикулы и туннельные нанотрубки. Кроме того, эти белки участвуют в ремоделировании липидной среды, влияя на организацию липидных рафтов и обеспечивая функциональную пластичность мембранных доменов, что способствует адаптации клеток к изменяющимся условиям. В патологических состояниях, включая опухоли, хроническое воспаление и нейродегенеративные заболевания, эпишаперомно-липидный интерфейс формирует патологически адаптивные сигнальные платформы, способствующие клеточной пластичности, лекарственной резистентности, инвазии и кооперативному поведению клеток. Предлагаемая теория мембранно-ассоциированного эпишаперома расширяет традиционное понимание цитоплазматических шаперонных сетей и предоставляет новую концептуальную основу для разработки диагностических маркеров и трансляционных терапевтических стратегий, направленных на селективное разрушение патологических мембранных платформ. Цель работы — обобщить современные данные о молекулярной организации и функциях эпишаперомно-липидного интерфейса и обсудить его значение в патогенезе социально значимых заболеваний человека.

1. Rodina A, Wang T, Yan P, et al. The epichaperome is an integrated chaperome network that facilitates tumour survival. Nature. 2016;538(7625):397–401. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature19807

2. Wang T, Rodina A, Dunphy MP, et al. Chaperome heterogeneity and its implications for cancer study and treatment. J Biol Chem. 2019;294(6):2162–2179. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.REV118.002811

3. Fedorov V, Kurkin A, Fofanov G, et al. Heat Shock Protein Chaperome Is a Multi-Faceted Vector for Tumor Cell Migratory Activity, Invasion, and Metastasis. Cells. 2025;14(23):1837. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14231837

4. Pasala C, Digwal CS, Sharma S, et al. Epichaperomes: redefining chaperone biology and therapeutic strategies in complex diseases. RSC Chem Biol. 2025;6(5):678–698. https://doi.org/10.1039/d5cb00010f

5. Amissah HA, Likhomanova R, Opoku G, et al. Plasma Membrane Epichaperome-Lipid Interface: Regulating Dynamics and Trafficking. Cells. 2025;14(20):1582. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14201582

6. Reindl J, Shevtsov M, Dollinger G, et al. Membrane Hsp70-supported cell-to-cell connections via tunneling nanotubes revealed by live-cell STED nanoscopy. Cell Stress Chaperones. 2019;24(1):213–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12192-018-00958-w

7. Amissah HA, Antwi MH, Amissah TA, et al. More than Just Protein Folding: The Epichaperome, Mastermind of the Cancer Cell. Cells. 2025;14(3):204. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells14030204

8. Digwal CS, Sharma S, Santhaseela AR, et al. Epichaperomes as a Gateway to Understanding, Diagnosing, and Treating Disease Through Rebalancing Protein–Protein Interaction Networks. In: Kostic M, Jones LH, editors. Protein Homeostasis in Drug Discovery: a Chemical Biology Perspective. John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2022. p. 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119774198.ch1

9. Ke X, Chen J, Peng L, et al. Heat shock protein 90/ Akt pathway participates in the cardioprotective effect of exogenous hydrogen sulfide against high glucose-induced injury to H9c2 cells Corrigendum. Int J Mol Med. 2017;39(4):1001–1010. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijmm.2017.2891

10. Rodina A, Wang T, Yan P, et al. The epichaperome is an integrated chaperome network that facilitates tumour survival. Nature. 2016;538(7625):397–401. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature19807

11. Zhang H, Burrows F. Targeting multiple signal transduction pathways through inhibition of Hsp90. Journal of Molecular Medicine. 2004;82(8):488–499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00109-004-0549-9

12. Manik C, Mindaugas A, Thorsten S, et al. The PI3K/ Akt signaling pathway regulates the expression of Hsp70, which critically contributes to Hsp90-chaperone function and tumor cell survival in multiple myeloma. Haematologica. 2013;98(7):1132– 1141. https://doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2012.066175

13. Paszek A, Kardyńska M, Bagnall J, et al. Heat shock response regulates stimulus-specificity and sensitivity of the pro-inflammatory NF-κB signalling. Cell Communication and Signaling. 2020;18(1):77. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12964-020-00583-0

14. Kourtis N, Lazaris C, Hockemeyer K, et al. Oncogenic hijacking of the stress response machinery in T cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Nature Medicine. 2018;24(8):1157–1166. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0105-8

15. Liang Y, Wang Y, Zhang Y, et al. HSPB1 facilitates chemoresistance through inhibiting ferroptotic cancer cell death and regulating NF-κB signaling pathway in breast cancer. Cell Death and Disease. 2023;14(7):434. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-023-05972-0

16. Singh MK, Shin Y, Ju S, et al. Heat Shock Response and Heat Shock Proteins: Current Understanding and Future Opportunities in Human Diseases. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2024;25(8):4209. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25084209

17. Wang X, Zhang Y, Zhao Y, et al. CD24 promoted cancer cell angiogenesis via Hsp90-mediated STAT3/VEGF signaling pathway in colorectal cancer. Oncotarget. 2016;7(34):55663–55676. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.10971

18. Chong KY, Kang M, Garofalo F, et al. Inhibition of Heat Shock Protein 90 suppresses TWIST1 Transcription. Mol Pharmacol. 2019;96(2):168–179. https://doi.org/10.1124/mol.119.116137

19. Schumacher JA, Crockett DK, Elenitoba-Johnson KSJ, et al. Proteome-wide changes induced by the Hsp90 inhibitor, geldanamycin in anaplastic large cell lymphoma cells. Proteomics. 2007;7(15):2603–2616. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmic.200700108

20. Schumacher JA, Crockett DK, Elenitoba-Johnson KS, et al. Proteome-wide changes induced by the Hsp90 inhibitor, geldanamycin in anaplastic large cell lymphoma cells. Proteomics. 2007;7(15):2603–2616. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmic.200700108

21. Liu GY, Sabatini DM. mTOR at the nexus of nutrition, growth, ageing and disease. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2020;21(4):183–203. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41580-019-0199-y

22. Ke X, Chen J, Peng L, et al. Heat shock protein 90/ Akt pathway participates in the cardioprotective effect of exogenous hydrogen sulfide against high glucose-induced injury to H9c2 cells. Int J Mol Med. 2017;39(4):1001–1010. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijmm.2017.2891

23. Chatterjee M, Andrulis M, Stühmer T, et al. The PI3K/ Akt signaling pathway regulates the expression of Hsp70, which critically contributes to Hsp90-chaperone function and tumor cell survival in multiple myeloma. Haematologica. 2013;98(7):1132– 1141. https://doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2012.066175

24. Zong H, Gozman A, Caldas-Lopes E, et al. A Hyperactive Signalosome in Acute Myeloid Leukemia Drives Addiction to a Tumor-Specific Hsp90 Species. Cell Rep. 2015;13(10):2159–2173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2015.10.073

25. Liu T, Zhang L, Joo D, et al. NF-κB signaling in inflammation. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2017;2:17023. https://doi.org/10.1038/sigtrans.2017.23

26. Lee KH, Lee CT, Kim YW, et al. Heat shock protein 70 negatively regulates the heat-shock-induced suppression of the IkappaB/NF-kappaB cascade by facilitating IkappaB kinase renaturation and blocking its further denaturation. Exp Cell Res. 2005;307(1):276–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yexcr.2005.03.014

27. Kourtis N, Lazaris C, Hockemeyer K, et al. Oncogenic hijacking of the stress response machinery in T cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Nat Med. 2018;24(8):1157–1166. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0105-8

28. Paszek A, Kardyńska M, Bagnall J, et al. Heat shock response regulates stimulus-specificity and sensitivity of the pro-inflammatory NF-κB signalling. Cell Commun Signal. 2020; 18(1):77. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12964-020-00583-0

29. Liang Y, Wang Y, Zhang Y, et al. HSPB1 facilitates chemoresistance through inhibiting ferroptotic cancer cell death and regulating NF-κB signaling pathway in breast cancer. Cell Death Dis. 2023;14(7):434. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-02305972-0

30. Jacobs MD, Harrison SC. Structure of an IkappaBalpha/NF-kappaB complex. Cell. 1998;95(6):749–758. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81698-0

31. Liu S, Shen G, Zhou X, et al. Hsp90 Promotes Gastric Cancer Cell Metastasis and Stemness by Regulating the Regional Distribution of Glycolysis-Related Metabolic Enzymes in the Cytoplasm. Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany). 2024;11(33):e2310109. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202310109

32. Hance MW, Dole K, Gopal U, et al. Secreted Hsp90 is a novel regulator of the epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) in prostate cancer. The Journal of biological chemistry. 2012;287(45): 37732–37744. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M112.389015

33. Singh MK, Shin Y, Ju S, et al. Heat Shock Response and Heat Shock Proteins: Current Understanding and Future Opportunities in Human Diseases. Int J Mol Sci. 2024;25(8):4209. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25084209

34. Wang X, Zhang Y, Zhao Y, et al. CD24 promoted cancer cell angiogenesis via Hsp90-mediated STAT3/VEGF signaling pathway in colorectal cancer. Oncotarget. 2016;7(34):55663– 55676. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.10971

35. Zhang H, Burrows F. Targeting multiple signal transduction pathways through inhibition of Hsp90. J Mol Med (Berl). 2004;82(8):488–499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00109-004-0549-9

36. Multhoff G, Botzler C, Jennen L, et al. Heat shock protein 72 on tumor cells: a recognition structure for natural killer cells. Journal of immunology (Baltimore, Md.: 1950). 1997; 158(9):4341–4350.

37. Shevtsov M, Huile G, Multhoff G. Membrane heat shock protein 70: a theranostic target for cancer therapy. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2018;373(1738):20160526. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2016.0526

38. Guzhova IV, Shevtsov MA, Abkin SV, et al. Intracellular and extracellular Hsp70 chaperone as a target for cancer therapy. Int J Hyperthermia. 2013;29(5):399–408. https://doi.org/10.3109/02656736.2013.807439

39. Gross C, Koelch W, DeMaio A, et al. Cell surface-bound heat shock protein 70 (Hsp70) mediates perforin-independent apoptosis by specific binding and uptake of granzyme B. J Biol Chem. 2003;278(42):41173–41181. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M302644200

40. Shevtsov M, Balogi Z, Khachatryan W, et al. Membrane-Associated Heat Shock Proteins in Oncology: From Basic Research to New Theranostic Targets. Cells. 2020;9(5):1263. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells9051263

41. Likhomanova R, Oganesyan E, Yudintceva N, et al. Glioblastoma cell motility and invasion is regulated by membrane-associated heat shock protein Hsp70. J Neurooncol. 2025;175(1):255–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-025-05127-5

42. Tagaeva R, Efimova S, Ischenko A, et al. A new look at Hsp70 activity in phosphatidylserine-enriched membranes: chaperone-induced quasi-interdigitated lipid phase. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):19233. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-46131-x

43. Makky A, Czajor J, Konovalov O, et al. X-ray reflectivity study of the heat shock protein Hsp70 interaction with an artificial cell membrane model. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):19157. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-46066-3

44. Gehrmann M, Liebisch G, Schmitz G, et al. Tumor-specific Hsp70 plasma membrane localization is enabled by the glycosphingolipid Gb3. PLoS One. 2008;3(4):e1925. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001925

45. Mollinedo F, Gajate C. Lipid rafts as signaling hubs in cancer cell survival/death and invasion: implications in tumor progression and therapy: Thematic Review Series: Biology of Lipid Rafts. Journal of Lipid Research. 2020;61(5):611–635. https://doi.org/10.1194/jlr.TR119000439

46. Anselmo S, Bonaccorso E, Gangemi C, et al. Lipid Rafts in Signalling, Diseases, and Infections: What Can Be Learned from Fluorescence Techniques? Membranes. 2025;15(1):6. https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes15010006

47. Codini M, Garcia-Gil M, Albi E. Cholesterol and sphingolipid enriched lipid rafts as therapeutic targets in cancer. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22020726

48. Elmallah MIY, Cordonnier M, Vautrot V, et al. Membrane-anchored heat-shock protein 70 (Hsp70) in cancer. Cancer Lett. 2020;469:134–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canlet.2019.10.037

49. Shevtsov M, Bobkov D, Yudintceva N, et al. Membrane-bound Heat Shock Protein mHsp70 Is Required for Migration and Invasion of Brain Tumors. Cancer Res Commun. 2024;4(8):2025–2044. https://doi.org/10.1158/2767-9764.CRC24-0094

50. Thakur G, Sathe G, Kundu I, et al. Membrane Interactome of a Recombinant Fragment of Human Surfactant Protein D Reveals GRP78 as a Novel Binding Partner in PC3, a Metastatic Prostate Cancer Cell Line. Front Immunol. 2020;11:600660. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.600660

51. Dores-Silva PR, Cauvi DM, Coto ALS, et al. Interaction of HSPA5 (Grp78, BIP) with negatively charged phospholipid membranes via oligomerization involving the N-terminal end domain. Cell Stress Chaperones. 2020;25(6):979–991. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12192-020-01134-9

52. Shani G, Fischer WH, Justice NJ, et al. GRP78 and Cripto form a complex at the cell surface and collaborate to inhibit transforming growth factor beta signaling and enhance cell growth. Mol Cell Biol. 2008;28(2):666–677. https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.01716-07

53. Shi W, Xu G, Wang C, et al. Heat shock 70-kDa protein 5 (Hspa5) is essential for pronephros formation by mediating retinoic acid signaling. J Biol Chem. 2015;290(1):577–589. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M114.591628

54. Al-Hashimi AA, Caldwell J, Gonzalez-Gronow M, et al. Binding of anti-GRP78 autoantibodies to cell surface GRP78 increases tissue factor procoagulant activity via the release of calcium from endoplasmic reticulum stores. J Biol Chem. 2010;285(37):28912–28923. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M110.119107

55. Feng X, Ning M, Chen B, et al. Comparative IP-MS Reveals HSPA5 and HSPA8 Interacting with Hemagglutinin Protein to Promote the Replication of Influenza A Virus. Pathogens. 2025;14(6):535. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens14060535

56. Ibrahim IM, Elfiky AA, Elgohary AM. Recognition through GRP78 is enhanced in the UK, South African, and Brazilian variants of SARS-CoV-2; An in silico perspective. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2021;562:89–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2021.05.058

57. Joshi P, Garg S, Mani S, et al. Targeting host inducible-heat shock protein 70 with PES-Cl is a promising antiviral strategy against SARS-CoV-2 infection and pathogenesis. Int J Biol Macromol. 2024;279(Pt 1):135069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.135069

58. Sriratanasak N, Chunhacha P, Ei ZZ, et al. Cisplatin Induces Senescent Lung Cancer Cell-Mediated Stemness Induction via GRP78/Akt-Dependent Mechanism. Biomedicines. 2022;10(11):2703. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10112703

59. Chen C, Feng C, Luo Q, et al. CD5L up-regulates the TGF-β signaling pathway and promotes renal fibrosis. Life Sci. 2024;354:122945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lfs.2024.122945

60. Han JM, Park SG, Liu B, et al. Aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase-interacting multifunctional protein 1/p43 controls endoplasmic reticulum retention of heat shock protein gp96: its pathological implications in lupus-like autoimmune diseases. Am J Pathol. 2007;170(6):2042–2054. https://doi.org/10.2353/ajpath.2007.061266

61. Scarneo SA, Smith AP, Favret J, et al. Expression of membrane Hsp90 is a molecular signature of T cell activation. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):18091. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-22788-8

62. Randow F, Seed B. Endoplasmic reticulum chaperone gp96 is required for innate immunity but not cell viability. Nat Cell Biol. 2001;3(10):891–896. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb1001-891

63. Liu B, Dai J, Zheng H, et al. Cell surface expression of an endoplasmic reticulum resident heat shock protein gp96 triggers MyD88-dependent systemic autoimmune diseases. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA. 2003;100(26):15824–15829. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2635458100

64. Li X, Wang B, Liu W, et al. Blockage of conformational changes of heat shock protein gp96 on cell membrane by a α-helix peptide inhibits HER2 dimerization and signaling in breast cancer. PLoS One. 2015;10(4):e0124647. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0124647

65. Hou J, Li X, Li C, et al. Plasma membrane gp96 enhances invasion and metastatic potential of liver cancer via regulation of uPAR. Molecular oncology. 2015;9(7):1312–1323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molonc.2015.03.004

66. Tsvetkova NM, Horváth I, Török Z, et al. Small heatshock proteins regulate membrane lipid polymorphism. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA. 2002; 99(21):13504–13509. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.192468399

67. Timsina R, Khadka NK, Maldonado D, et al. Interaction of alpha-crystallin with four major phospholipids of eye lens membranes. Exp Eye Res. 2021;202:108337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exer.2020.108337

68. Török Z, Goloubinoff P, Horváth I, et al. Synechocystis HSP17 is an amphitropic protein that stabilizes heat-stressed membranes and binds denatured proteins for subsequent chaperone-mediated refolding. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA. 2001;98(6):3098–3103. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.051619498

69. Gehrmann M, Marienhagen J, Eichholtz-Wirth H, et al. Dual function of membrane-bound heat shock protein 70 (Hsp70), Bag-4, and Hsp40: protection against radiation-induced effects and target structure for natural killer cells. Cell death and differentiation. 2005;12(1):38–51. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.cdd.4401510

70. Cappello F, Conway de Macario E, Marasà L, et al. Hsp60 expression, new locations, functions and perspectives for cancer diagnosis and therapy. Cancer Biol Ther. 2008;7(6):801–809. https://doi.org/10.4161/cbt.7.6.6281

71. Meshalkina DA, Shevtsov MA, Dobrodumov AV, et al. Knock-down of Hdj2/DNAJA1 co-chaperone results in an unexpected burst of tumorigenicity of C6 glioblastoma cells. Oncotarget. 2016;7(16):22050–22063. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.7872

72. Almeida PF. Thermodynamics of lipid interactions in complex bilayers. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2009;1788(1):72–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbamem.2008.08.007

73. Sezgin E, Levental I, Mayor S, et al. The mystery of membrane organization: composition, regulation and roles of lipid rafts. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2017;18(6):361–374. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm.2017.16

74. De Maio A, Hightower L. The interaction of heat shock proteins with cellular membranes: a historical perspective. Cell Stress Chaperones. 2021;26(5):769–783. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12192-021-01228-y

75. Nimmervoll B, Chtcheglova LA, Juhasz K, et al. Cell surface localised Hsp70 is a cancer specific regulator of clathrin-independent endocytosis. FEBS Lett. 2015;589(19 Pt B):2747–2753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.febslet.2015.07.037

76. Ma DK, Li Z, Lu AY, et al. Acyl-CoA dehydrogenase drives heat adaptation by sequestering fatty acids. Cell. 2015;161(5):1152–1163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2015.04.026

77. Panconi L, Lorenz CD, May RC, et al. Phospholipid tail asymmetry allows cellular adaptation to anoxic environments. J Biol Chem. 2023;299(9):105134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbc.2023.105134

78. Kumarage T, Gupta S, Morris NB, et al. Cholesterol modulates membrane elasticity via unified biophysical laws. Nat Commun. 2025;16(1):7024. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-62106-0

79. Kaddah S, Khreich N, Kaddah F, et al. Cholesterol modulates the liposome membrane fluidity and permeability for a hydrophilic molecule. Food Chem Toxicol. 2018;113:40– 48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2018.01.017

80. Aguilar J, Malacrida L, Gunther G, et al. Cells immersed in collagen matrices show a decrease in plasma membrane fluidity as the matrix stiffness increases. Biochim Biophys Acta Biomembr. 2023;1865(7):184176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbamem.2023.184176

81. Umebayashi M, Takemoto S, Reymond L, et al. A covalently linked probe to monitor local membrane properties surrounding plasma membrane proteins. J Cell Biol. 2023;222(3):e202206119. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.202206119

82. Lin BJ, Tsao SH, Chen A, et al. Lipid rafts sense and direct electric field-induced migration. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2017;114(32):8568–8573. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1702526114

83. Mangiarotti A, Sabri E, Schmidt KV, et al. Lipid packing and cholesterol content regulate membrane wetting and remodeling by biomolecular condensates. Nat Commun. 2025;16(1):2756. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-57985-2

84. Findlay HE, Booth PJ. The folding, stability and function of lactose permease differ in their dependence on bilayer lipid composition. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):13056. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-13290-7

85. Dores-Silva PR, Cauvi DM, Coto ALS, et al. Human heat shock cognate protein (HSC70/HSPA8) interacts with negatively charged phospholipids by a different mechanism than other HSP70s and brings HSP90 into membranes. Cell Stress Chaperones. 2021;26(4):671–684. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12192-021-01210-8

86. Chowdary TK, Raman B, Ramakrishna T, et al. Interaction of mammalian Hsp22 with lipid membranes. Biochem J. 2007;401(2):437–445. https://doi.org/10.1042/BJ20061046

87. Csoboz B, Gombos I, Kóta Z, et al. The Small Heat Shock Protein, HSPB1, Interacts with and Modulates the Physical Structure of Membranes. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23(13):947– 956. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23137317

88. Secco V, Tiago T, Staats R, et al. HSPB6: A lipid-dependent molecular chaperone inhibits α-synuclein aggregation. iScience. 2024;27(9):110657. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2024.110657

89. Maitre M, Weidmann S, Rieu A, et al. The oligomer plasticity of the small heat-shock protein Lo18 from Oenococcus oeni influences its role in both membrane stabilization and protein protection. Biochem J. 2012;444(1):97–104. https://doi.org/10.1042/BJ20120066

90. Yang E, Wang X, Gong Z, et al. Exosome-mediated metabolic reprogramming: the emerging role in tumor microenvironment remodeling and its influence on cancer progression. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2020;5(1):242. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-020-00359-5

91. Caponnetto F, Manini I, Skrap M, et al. Size-dependent cellular uptake of exosomes. Nanomedicine: nanotechnology, biology, and medicine. 2017;13(3):1011–1020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nano.2016.12.009

92. Isaac R, Reis FCG, Ying W, et al. Exosomes as mediators of intercellular crosstalk in metabolism. Cell Metab. 2021;33(9):1744–1762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2021.08.006

93. Svensson KJ, Christianson HC, Wittrup A, et al. Exosome uptake depends on ERK1/2-heat shock protein 27 signaling and lipid Raft-mediated endocytosis negatively regulated by caveolin-1. J Biol Chem. 2013;288(24):17713–17724. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M112.445403

94. Logan CJ, Staton CC, Oliver JT, et al. Thermotolerance in S. cerevisiae as a model to study extracellular vesicle biology. J Extracell Vesicles. 2024;13(5):e12431. https://doi.org/10.1002/jev2.12431

95. Bonsergent E, Grisard E, Buchrieser J, et al. Quantitative characterization of extracellular vesicle uptake and content delivery within mammalian cells. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):1864. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22126-y

96. Singh P, Jay DG. The role of eHsp90 in extracellular Matrix Remodeling, Tumor Invasiveness, and Metastasis. Cancers (Basel). 2024;16(22):3873. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16223873

97. Gong Z, Wu T, Zhao Y, et al. Intercellular tunneling nanotubes as natural biophotonic conveyors. ACS Nano. 2025;19(1):1036–1043. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.4c12681

98. Sartori-Rupp A, Cordero Cervantes D, Pepe A, et al. Correlative cryo-electron microscopy reveals the structure of TNTs in neuronal cells. Nat Commun. 2019;10(1):342. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-08178-7

99. Hase K, Kimura S, Takatsu H, et al. M-Sec promotes membrane nanotube formation by interacting with Ral and the exocyst complex. Nat Cell Biol. 2009;11(12):1427–1432. 1427–1432. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb1990

100. Hanna SJ, McCoy-Simandle K, Miskolci V, et al. The Role of Rho-GTPases and actin polymerization during Macrophage Tunneling Nanotube Biogenesis. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):8547. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08950-7

101. Scheiblich H, Eikens F, Wischhof L, et al. Microglia rescue neurons from aggregate-induced neuronal dysfunction and death through tunneling nanotubes. Neuron. 2024;112(18):3106– 3125.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2024.06.029

102. Wang X, Gerdes HH. Transfer of mitochondria via tunneling nanotubes rescues apoptotic PC12 cells. Cell Death Differ. 2015;22(7):1181–1191. https://doi.org/10.1038/cdd.2014.211

103. Kimura S, Yamashita M, Yamakami-Kimura M, et al. Distinct roles for the N- and C-terminal regions of M-Sec in plasma membrane deformation during tunneling nanotube formation. Sci Rep. 2016;6:33548. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep33548

104. Luo Y, Pezacki AT, Matier CD, et al. A novel route of intercellular copper transport and detoxification in oyster hemocytes. J Hazard Mater. 2024;476:135003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2024.135003

105. Juhasz K, Lipp AM, Nimmervoll B, et al. The complex function of hsp70 in metastatic cancer. Cancers (Basel). 2013;6(1):42–66. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers6010042

106. Wu Z, Fang ZX, Hou YY, et al. Exosomes in metastasis of colorectal cancers: Friends or foes? World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2023;15(5):731–756. https://doi.org/10.4251/wjgo.v15.i5.731

107. Osswald M, Jung E, Sahm F, et al. Brain tumour cells interconnect to a functional and resistant network. Nature. 2015;528(7580):93–98. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16071

108. Chalmin F, Ladoire S, Mignot G, et al. Membrane-associated Hsp72 from tumor-derived exosomes mediates STAT3-dependent immunosuppressive function of mouse and human myeloid-derived suppressor cells. J Clin Invest. 2010;120(2):457–471. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI40483

109. Zhang X, Zhang X, Huang W, et al. The role of heat shock proteins in the regulation of fibrotic diseases. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy. 2021;135:111067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2020.111067

110. Ginsberg SD, Neubert TA, Sharma S, et al. Disease-specific interactome alterations via epichaperomics: the case for Alzheimer’s disease. Febs j. 2022;289(8):2047–2066. https://doi.org/10.1111/febs.16031

111. Ginsberg SD, Joshi S, Sharma S, et al. The penalty of stress — Epichaperomes negatively reshaping the brain in neurodegenerative disorders. J Neurochem. 2021;159(6):958–979. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnc.15525

112. Lackie RE, Maciejewski A, Ostapchenko VG, et al. The Hsp70/Hsp90 chaperone machinery in neurodegenerative diseases. Frontiers in Neuroscience. 2017;11:254. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2017.00254.