Usage Information

Lupus and proliferative nephritis are PAD4 independent in murine models
Rachael A. Gordon, … , Tanya N. Mayadas, Mark J. Shlomchik
Rachael A. Gordon, … , Tanya N. Mayadas, Mark J. Shlomchik
Published May 18, 2017
Citation Information: JCI Insight. 2017;2(10):e92926. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.92926.
View: Text | PDF
Research Article Immunology

Lupus and proliferative nephritis are PAD4 independent in murine models

Abstract

Though recent reports suggest that neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) are a source of antigenic nucleic acids in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), we recently showed that inhibition of NETs by targeting the NADPH oxidase complex via cytochrome b-245, β polypeptide (cybb) deletion exacerbated disease in the MRL.Faslpr lupus mouse model. While these data challenge the paradigm that NETs promote lupus, it is conceivable that global regulatory properties of cybb and cybb-independent NETs confound these findings. Furthermore, recent reports indicate that inhibitors of peptidyl arginine deiminase, type IV (Padi4), a distal mediator of NET formation, improve lupus in murine models. Here, to clarify the contribution of NETs to SLE, we employed a genetic approach to delete Padi4 in the MRL.Faslpr model and used a pharmacological approach to inhibit PADs in both the anti–glomerular basement membrane model of proliferative nephritis and a human-serum-transfer model of SLE. In contrast to prior inhibitor studies, we found that deletion of Padi4 did not ameliorate any aspect of nephritis, loss of tolerance, or immune activation. Pharmacological inhibition of PAD activity had no effect on end-organ damage in inducible models of glomerulonephritis. These data provide a direct challenge to the concept that NETs promote autoimmunity and target organ injury in SLE.

Authors

Rachael A. Gordon, Jan M. Herter, Florencia Rosetti, Allison M. Campbell, Hiroshi Nishi, Michael Kashgarian, Sheldon I. Bastacky, Anthony Marinov, Kevin M. Nickerson, Tanya N. Mayadas, Mark J. Shlomchik

×

Usage data is cumulative from January 2020 through January 2021.

Usage JCI PMC
Text version 398 0
PDF 65 0
Figure 59 0
Supplemental data 23 0
Citation downloads 7 0
Totals 552 0
Total Views 552
(Click and drag on plot area to zoom in. Click legend items above to toggle)

Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.

Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.

Advertisement