4.8 Article

E3 ubiquitin ligase GRAIL controls primary T cell activation and oral tolerance

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0908957106

关键词

anergy; E3 ligase; ERK; PKC theta; MAP kinase

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health
  2. American Diabetes Association
  3. German Research Foundation
  4. Arthritis National Research Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

T cell unresponsiveness or anergy is one of the mechanisms that maintain inactivity of self-reactive lymphocytes. E3 ubiquitin ligases are important mediators of the anergic state. The RING finger E3 ligase GRAIL is thought to selectively function in anergic T cells but its mechanism of action and its role in vivo are largely unknown. We show here that genetic deletion of Grail in mice leads not only to loss of an anergic phenotype in various models but also to hyperactivation of primary CD4(+) T cells. Grail(-/-) CD4(+) T cells hyperproliferate in vitro to TCR stimulation alone or with concomitant anti-CD28 costimulation, with transient increased survival. In vitro differentiated T helper 1 cells show slight but significant hypersecretion of IFN-gamma in Grail(-/-) mice whereas Th2 and Th17 cytokine secretions are unchanged. Consistent with defective in vitro anergy, oral tolerance is abolished in vivo in OT-II TCR transgenic Grail(-/-) mice fed with ovalbumin. In experimental allergic encephalitis, a model of organ-specific autoimmunity, oral tolerization with myelin basic protein was abrogated as well in Grail(-/-) mice. On the protein level, Grail(-/-) naive T cells show no significant differences of total and phosphorylated levels of ZAP70, phospholipase C gamma 1, and MAP kinases p38 and JNK but elevated baseline levels of MAP kinase ERK1/2. In summary, we define a role for GRAIL in primary T cell activation, survival, and differentiation. In addition, we formally prove an indispensable role for GRAIL in T cell anergy and oral tolerance-a promising, antigen-specific strategy to treat autoimmune diseases.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据