Association of chromosome 22q11 deletion with isolated anomalies of aortic arch laterality and branching

AbstractOBJECTIVESThe purpose of this study was to determine the frequency of chromosome 22q11 deletions in patients with isolated anomalies of the aortic arch and its branches.BACKGROUNDChromosome 22q11 deletions are often present in patients with certain forms of congenital cardiovascular disease, including tetralogy of Fallot, truncus arteriosus and interruption of the aortic arch. Among patients with these anomalies, chromosome 22q11 deletion is more common in those with abnormal aortic arch laterality or branching.METHODSWe studied 66 patients with isolated anomalies of the aortic arch and no associated intracardiac defects for deletions within chromosome 22q11, using fluorescence in situ hybridization with the cosmid probe N25 (D22S75). Arch anomalies included: double aortic arch (n = 22); right aortic arch with aberrant left subclavian artery (n = 28); right aortic arch with mirror-image branching and a vascular ring formed by a left-sided ductus from the descending aorta (n = 5); right aortic arch with mirror-image branching and no vascular ring (n = 4); and left aortic arch with aberrant right subclavian artery (n = 7). In addition, four patients had a cervical aortic arch, four had aortic coarctation and six had hypoplasia/atresia of the proximal pulmonary arteries.RESULTSChromosome 22q11 deletions were found in 16 patients (24%) across the full spectrum of anomalies studied. Among the morphologic variables analyzed, only hypoplasia/atresia of the proximal pulmonary arteries correlated with the deletion (p = 0.03). Among patients with a double arch, the frequency of chromosome 22q11 deletion was higher in those with an atretic minor arch than it was in those with a patent minor arch (p = 0.02).CONCLUSIONSChromosome 22q11 deletion is associated with isolated anomalies of laterality or branching of the aortic arch in 24% of cases in our series. These findings should alert the clinician to consider deletion screening in patients with isolated anomalies of the aortic arch

Novel structural determinants in human SECIS elements modulate the translational recoding of UGA as selenocysteine

The selenocysteine insertion sequence (SECIS) element directs the translational recoding of UGA as selenocysteine. In eukaryotes, the SECIS is located downstream of the UGA codon in the 3′-UTR of the selenoprotein mRNA. Despite poor sequence conservation, all SECIS elements form a similar stem-loop structure containing a putative kink-turn motif. We functionally characterized the 26 SECIS elements encoded in the human genome. Surprisingly, the SECIS elements displayed a wide range of UGA recoding activities, spanning several 1000-fold in vivo and several 100-fold in vitro. The difference in activity between a representative strong and weak SECIS element was not explained by differential binding affinity of SECIS binding Protein 2, a limiting factor for selenocysteine incorporation. Using chimeric SECIS molecules, we identified the internal loop and helix 2, which flank the kink-turn motif, as critical determinants of UGA recoding activity. The simultaneous presence of a GC base pair in helix 2 and a U in the 5′-side of the internal loop was a statistically significant predictor of weak recoding activity. Thus, the SECIS contains intrinsic information that modulates selenocysteine incorporation efficiency

Selenoprotein gene nomenclature

The human genome contains 25 genes coding for selenocysteine-containing proteins (selenoproteins). These proteins are involved in a variety of functions, most notably redox homeostasis. Selenoprotein enzymes with known functions are designated according to these functions: TXNRD1, TXNRD2, and TXNRD3 (thioredoxin reductases), GPX1, GPX2, GPX3, GPX4 and GPX6 (glutathione peroxidases), DIO1, DIO2, and DIO3 (iodothyronine deiodinases), MSRB1 (methionine-R-sulfoxide reductase 1) and SEPHS2 (selenophosphate synthetase 2). Selenoproteins without known functions have traditionally been denoted by SEL or SEP symbols. However, these symbols are sometimes ambiguous and conflict with the approved nomenclature for several other genes. Therefore, there is a need to implement a rational and coherent nomenclature system for selenoprotein-encoding genes. Our solution is to use the root symbol SELENO followed by a letter. This nomenclature applies to SELENOF (selenoprotein F, the 15 kDa selenoprotein, SEP15), SELENOH (selenoprotein H, SELH, C11orf31), SELENOI (selenoprotein I, SELI, EPT1), SELENOK (selenoprotein K, SELK), SELENOM (selenoprotein M, SELM), SELENON (selenoprotein N, SEPN1, SELN), SELENOO (selenoprotein O, SELO), SELENOP (selenoprotein P, SeP, SEPP1, SELP), SELENOS (selenoprotein S, SELS, SEPS1, VIMP), SELENOT (selenoprotein T, SELT), SELENOV (selenoprotein V, SELV) and SELENOW (selenoprotein W, SELW, SEPW1). This system, approved by the HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee, also resolves conflicting, missing and ambiguous designations for selenoprotein genes and is applicable to selenoproteins across vertebrates

Identification of a signature motif for the eIF4a3–SECIS interaction

eIF4a3, a DEAD-box protein family member, is a component of the exon junction complex which assembles on spliced mRNAs. The protein also acts as a transcript-selective translational repressor of selenoprotein synthesis during selenium deficiency. Selenocysteine (Sec) incorporation into selenoproteins requires a Sec Insertion Sequence (SECIS) element in the 3′ untranslated region. During selenium deficiency, eIF4a3 binds SECIS elements from non-essential selenoproteins, preventing Sec insertion. We identified a molecular signature for the eIF4a3-SECIS interaction using RNA gel shifts, surface plasmon resonance and enzymatic foot printing. Our results support a two-site interaction model, where eIF4a3 binds the internal and apical loops of the SECIS. Additionally, the stability of the complex requires uridine in the SECIS core. In terms of protein requirements, the two globular domains of eIF4a3, which are connected by a linker, are both critical for SECIS binding. Compared to full-length eIF4a3, the two domains in trans bind with a lower association rate but notably, the uridine is no longer important for complex stability. These results provide insight into how eIF4a3 discriminates among SECIS elements and represses translation

Nucleolin binds to a subset of selenoprotein mRNAs and regulates their expression

Selenium, an essential trace element, is incorporated into selenoproteins as selenocysteine (Sec), the 21st amino acid. In order to synthesize selenoproteins, a translational reprogramming event must occur since Sec is encoded by the UGA stop codon. In mammals, the recoding of UGA as Sec depends on the selenocysteine insertion sequence (SECIS) element, a stem-loop structure in the 3′ untranslated region of the transcript. The SECIS acts as a platform for RNA-binding proteins, which mediate or regulate the recoding mechanism. Using UV crosslinking, we identified a 110 kDa protein, which binds with high affinity to SECIS elements from a subset of selenoprotein mRNAs. The crosslinking activity was purified by RNA affinity chromatography and identified as nucleolin by mass spectrometry analysis. In vitro binding assays showed that purified nucleolin discriminates among SECIS elements in the absence of other factors. Based on siRNA experiments, nucleolin is required for the optimal expression of certain selenoproteins. There was a good correlation between the affinity of nucleolin for a SECIS and its effect on selenoprotein expression. As selenoprotein transcript levels and localization did not change in siRNA-treated cells, our results suggest that nucleolin selectively enhances the expression of a subset of selenoproteins at the translational level

31st Annual Meeting and Associated Programs of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC 2016) : part two

Background The immunological escape of tumors represents one of the main ob- stacles to the treatment of malignancies. The blockade of PD-1 or CTLA-4 receptors represented a milestone in the history of immunotherapy. However, immune checkpoint inhibitors seem to be effective in specific cohorts of patients. It has been proposed that their efficacy relies on the presence of an immunological response. Thus, we hypothesized that disruption of the PD-L1/PD-1 axis would synergize with our oncolytic vaccine platform PeptiCRAd. Methods We used murine B16OVA in vivo tumor models and flow cytometry analysis to investigate the immunological background. Results First, we found that high-burden B16OVA tumors were refractory to combination immunotherapy. However, with a more aggressive schedule, tumors with a lower burden were more susceptible to the combination of PeptiCRAd and PD-L1 blockade. The therapy signifi- cantly increased the median survival of mice (Fig. 7). Interestingly, the reduced growth of contralaterally injected B16F10 cells sug- gested the presence of a long lasting immunological memory also against non-targeted antigens. Concerning the functional state of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), we found that all the immune therapies would enhance the percentage of activated (PD-1pos TIM- 3neg) T lymphocytes and reduce the amount of exhausted (PD-1pos TIM-3pos) cells compared to placebo. As expected, we found that PeptiCRAd monotherapy could increase the number of antigen spe- cific CD8+ T cells compared to other treatments. However, only the combination with PD-L1 blockade could significantly increase the ra- tio between activated and exhausted pentamer positive cells (p= 0.0058), suggesting that by disrupting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis we could decrease the amount of dysfunctional antigen specific T cells. We ob- served that the anatomical location deeply influenced the state of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes. In fact, TIM-3 expression was in- creased by 2 fold on TILs compared to splenic and lymphoid T cells. In the CD8+ compartment, the expression of PD-1 on the surface seemed to be restricted to the tumor micro-environment, while CD4 + T cells had a high expression of PD-1 also in lymphoid organs. Interestingly, we found that the levels of PD-1 were significantly higher on CD8+ T cells than on CD4+ T cells into the tumor micro- environment (p < 0.0001). Conclusions In conclusion, we demonstrated that the efficacy of immune check- point inhibitors might be strongly enhanced by their combination with cancer vaccines. PeptiCRAd was able to increase the number of antigen-specific T cells and PD-L1 blockade prevented their exhaus- tion, resulting in long-lasting immunological memory and increased median survival