4.6 Article

Differences in Steap3 expression are a mechanism of genetic variation of RBC storage and oxidative damage in mice

Journal

BLOOD ADVANCES
Volume 3, Issue 15, Pages 2272-2285

Publisher

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2019000605

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [R01 HL095470, P01 HL086773]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Red blood cells (RBCs) are the most numerous cell type in the body and serve a vital purpose of delivering oxygen to essentially all tissues. In addition to the central role of RBCs in health and disease, RBC storage is a requirement for the >90 million units of RBC transfusions given to millions of recipients each year, worldwide. It is well known that there is genetic donor-todonor variability in how human RBCs store, rendering blood a nonstandardized therapeutic with a wide range of biological properties from unit to unit, by the time it is transfused. As with humans, genetic variation exists in how murine RBCs, from different strains of mice, store and perform after transfusion. The genetic mechanisms for variation, in humans and mice, both remain obscure. Combining advanced metabolomics, genetics, and molecular and cellular biology approaches, we identify genetic variation in six-transmembrane epithelial antigen of prostate 3 (Steap3) expression as a critical and previously unrecognized mechanism of oxidative damage of RBCs during storage. Increased levels of Steap3 result in degradation of cellular membrane through lipid peroxidation, leading to failure of RBC homeostasis and hemolysis/clearance of RBCs. This article is the first report of a role of Steap3 in mature RBCs; it defines a new mechanism of redox biology in RBCs with a substantial effect upon RBC function and provides a novel mechanistic determinant of genetic variation of RBC storage.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available