4.8 Article

An IRF8-binding promoter variant and AIRE control CHRNA1 promiscuous expression in thymus

期刊

NATURE
卷 448, 期 7156, 页码 934-U9

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nature06066

关键词

-

资金

  1. MRC [G117/490] Funding Source: UKRI
  2. Medical Research Council [G117/490] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. Medical Research Council [G117/490] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Promiscuous expression of tissue-restricted auto-antigens in the thymus imposes T-cell tolerance and provides protection from autoimmune diseases(1-3). Promiscuous expression of a set of self-antigens occurs in medullary thymic epithelial cells(4,5) and is partly controlled by the autoimmune regulator (AIRE), a nuclear protein for which loss-of-function mutations cause the type 1 autoimmune polyendocrine syndrome(6,7). However, additional factors must be involved in the regulation of this promiscuous expression. Here we describe a mechanism controlling thymic transcription of a prototypic tissue-restricted human auto-antigen gene, CHRNA1. This gene encodes the alpha-subunit of the muscle acetylcholine receptor, which is the main target of pathogenic auto-antibodies in autoimmune myasthenia gravis(8,9). On re-sequencing theCHRNA1 gene, we identified a functional bi-allelic variant in the promoter that is associated with early onset of disease in two independent human populations (France and United Kingdom). We show that this variant prevents binding of interferon regulatory factor 8 (IRF8) and abrogates CHRNA1 promoter activity in thymic epithelial cells in vitro. Notably, both the CHRNA1 promoter variant and AIRE modulate CHRNA1 messenger RNA levels in human medullary thymic epithelial cells ex vivo and also in a transactivation assay. These findings reveal a critical function of AIRE and the interferon signalling pathway in regulating quantitative expression of this auto-antigen in the thymus, suggesting that together they set the threshold for self-tolerance versus autoimmunity.

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