4.8 Article

The CD94/NKG2A inhibitory receptor educates uterine NK cells to optimize pregnancy outcomes in humans and mice

期刊

IMMUNITY
卷 54, 期 6, 页码 1231-+

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2021.03.021

关键词

-

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust [200841/Z/16/Z, RG86992]
  2. Medical Research Council [MR/P001092/1]
  3. European Research Council under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program [695551]
  4. MedImmune-Cambridge PhD fellowship
  5. Centre for Trophoblast Research PhD fellowship
  6. Wellcome Trust [200841/Z/16/Z] Funding Source: Wellcome Trust

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Genetic ablation of NKG2A in dams mated with wild-type males may result in suboptimal maternal vascular responses during pregnancy, leading to various abnormalities similar to human preeclampsia. The study also suggests that the maternal HLA-B allele plays a significant role in influencing NKG2A education, potentially affecting the risk of developing preeclampsia.
The conserved CD94/NKG2A inhibitory receptor is expressed by nearly all human and similar to 50% of mouse uterine natural killer (uNK) cells. Binding human HLA-E and mouse Qa-1, NKG2A drives NK cell education, a process of unknown physiological importance influenced by HLA-B alleles. Here, we show that NKG2A genetic ablation in dams mated with wild-type males caused suboptimal maternal vascular responses in pregnancy, accompanied by perturbed placental gene expression, reduced fetal weight, greater rates of smaller fetuses with asymmetric growth, and abnormal brain development. These are features of the human syndrome preeclampsia. In a genome-wide association study of 7,219 pre-eclampsia cases, we found a 7% greater relative risk associated with the maternal HLA-B allele that does not favor NKG2A education. These results show that the maternal HLA-B -> HLA-E -> NKG2A pathway contributes to healthy pregnancy and may have repercussions on offspring health, thus establishing the physiological relevance for NK cell education.

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