4.6 Article

Genes within the Idd5 and Idd9/11 diabetes susceptibility loci affect the pathogenic activity of B cells in nonobese diabetic mice

Journal

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 177, Issue 10, Pages 7033-7041

Publisher

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.177.10.7033

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK046266, R01 DK051090, R29 DK046266, DK51090, DK46266] Funding Source: Medline
  2. Wellcome Trust [061859] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Autoreactive T cells clearly mediate the pancreatic 6 cell destruction causing type I diabetes (T1D). However, studies in NOD mice indicate that B cells also contribute to pathogenesis because their ablation by introduction of an Ig mu(null) mutation elicits T1D resistance. T1D susceptibility is restored in NOD.Ig mu(null) mice that are irradiated and reconstituted with syngeneic bone marrow plus NOD B cells, but not syngeneic bone marrow alone. Thus, we hypothesized some non-MHC T1D susceptibility (Idd) genes contribute to disease by allowing development of pathogenic B cells. Supporting this hypothesis was the finding that unlike those from NOD donors, engraftment with B cells from H2(g7) MHC-matched, but T1D-resistant, nonobese-resistant (NOR) mice failed to restore full disease susceptibility in NOD.Ig mu(null) recipients. T1D resistance in NOR mice is mainly encoded within the Idd13, Idd5.2, and Idd9/11 loci. B cells from NOD congenic stocks containing Idd9/11 or Idd5.1/5.2-resistance loci, respectively, derived from the NOR or C57BL/10 strains were characterized by suppressed diabetogenic activity. Immature autoreactive B cells in NOD mice have an impaired ability to be rendered anergic upon Ag engagement. Interestingly, both Idd5.1/5.2 and Idd9/11-resistance loci were found to normalize this B cell tolerogenic process, which may represent a mechanism contributing to the inhibition of T1D.

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