4.6 Article

BMP-7 induces apoptosis in human germinal center B cells and is influenced by TGF-β receptor type I ALK5

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 12, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177188

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Selection and maturation of B cells into plasma cells producing high-affinity antibodies occur in germinal centers (GC). GCs form transiently in secondary lymphoid organs upon antigen challenge, and the GC reaction is a highly regulated process. TGF-beta is a potent negative regulator, but the influence of other family members including bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) is less known. Studies of human peripheral blood B lymphocytes showed that BMP-6 suppressed plasmablast differentiation, whereas BMP-7 induced apoptosis. Here, we show that human naive and GC B cells had a strikingly different receptor expression pattern. GC B cells expressed high levels of BMP type I receptor but low levels of type II receptors, whereas naive B cells had the opposite pattern. Furthermore, GC B cells had elevated levels of downstream signaling components SMAD1 and SMAD5, but reduced levels of the inhibitory SMAD7. Functional assays of GC B cells revealed that BMP-7 suppressed the viability-promoting effect of CD40L and IL-21, but had no effect on CD40L- and IL-21-induced differentiation into plasmablasts. BMP-7-induced apoptosis was counteracted by a selective TGF-beta type I receptor (ALK4/5/7) inhibitor, but not by a selective BMP receptor type I inhibitor. Furthermore, overexpression of truncated ALK5 in a B-cell line counteracted BMP-7-induced apoptosis, whereas overexpression of truncated ALK4 had no effect. BMP-7 mRNA and protein was readily detected in tonsillar B cells, indicating a physiological relevance of the study. Altogether, we identified BMP-7 as a negative regulator of GC B-cell survival. The effect was counteracted by truncated ALK5, suggesting greater complexity in regulating BMP-7 signaling than previously believed.

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

4.6
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