| Literature DB >> 28424685 |
Eszter Trojnár1, Mihály Józsi2, Katalin Uray3, Dorottya Csuka1, Ágnes Szilágyi1, Danko Milosevic4, Vesna D Stojanović5, Brankica Spasojević6, Krisztina Rusai7, Thomas Müller7, Klaus Arbeiter7, Kata Kelen8, Attila J Szabó8, György S Reusz8, Satu Hyvärinen9, T Sakari Jokiranta9, Zoltán Prohászka1.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In autoimmune atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome (aHUS), the complement regulator factor H (FH) is blocked by FH autoantibodies, while 90% of the patients carry a homozygous deletion of its homolog complement FH-related protein 1 (CFHR1). The functional consequence of FH-blockade is widely established; however, the molecular basis of autoantibody binding and the role of CFHR1 deficiency in disease pathogenesis are still unknown. We performed epitope mapping of FH to provide structural insight in the autoantibody recruitment on FH and potentially CFHR1.Entities:
Keywords: CFHR1; atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome; complement factor H; epitope mapping; factor H autoantibody
Year: 2017 PMID: 28424685 PMCID: PMC5371605 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00302
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 7.561
Patients with the diagnosis of atypical HUS enrolled in this study who had positive ELISA results for anti-factor H (FH) antibodies (>110 AU/ml) at the time of presentation.
| Patient code | Age at disease onset (years) | Gender | FH autoantibody level in the acute phase of HUS (AU/ml) | FH autoantibody level in the convalescence phase of HUS (AU/ml) | MLPA analysis of CFHR1 and CFHR3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | 6.5 | Male | 10,067 | 136 | Homozygous deletion of CFHR1 and CFHR3 |
| P2 | 8.5 | Male | 2,190 | 125 | Homozygous deletion of CFHR1 and CFHR3 |
| P3 | 10.5 | Female | 1,306 | 93 | Homozygous deletion of CFHR1 and CFHR3 |
| P4 | 8 | Female | 2,221 | 99 | Homozygous deletion of CFHR1 and heterozygous deletion of CFHR3 |
| P5 | 8 | Male | 2,725 | 213 | Heterozygous deletion of CFHR1 and heterozygous deletion of CFHR3 |
| P6 | 8 | Male | 209 | 55 | Homozygous deletion of CFHR1 and CFHR3 |
| P7 | 11 | Male | 329 | 89 | Homozygous deletion of CFHR1 and CFHR3 |
| P8 | 11 | Female | 9,152 | No sample available | Homozygous deletion of CFHR1 and CFHR3 |
Major clinical characteristics and results of multiplex ligation dependent-probe amplification (MLPA) are listed.
Figure 1Relative binding of serum factor H (FH) autoantibodies to the synthetic FH peptides in control patients and in acute phase of atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome. The mapped FH domains were short consensus repeat (SCR) 19 (A), SCR 20 (B) and the fragment of CFHR1 SCR domain 5 homolog to that of FH amino acids 1177–1211 (C). We analyzed the sera of 10 control children (black bars) and 8 children in the acute phase of HUS (white bars), data represent mean of relative autoantibody binding of each group with SEM. Relative autoantibody binding is expressed as the ratio of ODsample/ODmin, where ODsample is the mean of duplicate optical density (OD) values of the test samples and ODmin is the mean binding to control HSP480–489 peptide that showed the lowest binding in our experiments. Numbering on the x axis represents the initial and final amino acid of each tested peptide. Difference in autoantibody binding to the indicated peptides was determined with Mann–Whitney test. Statistical significance is indicated by asterisks (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01).
Figure 2Epitope specific relative anti-factor H autoantibody binding to the linear epitopes in convalescence (gray bars) versus the acute phase (white bars) of atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome. The mapped FH domains were short consensus repeat (SCR) 19 (A), SCR 20 (B) and the fragment of CFHR1 SCR domain 5 homolog to that of FH amino acids 1177-1211 (C). Analysis of seven patients is shown as mean and SEM of the relative autoantibody binding (ODsample/ODmin) of each group, where ODsample is the mean of duplicate optical density (OD) values of the test samples and ODmin is the mean binding to control HSP480–489 peptide. Numbering on the x axis shows the initial and final amino acid of each tested peptide. Statistical analysis for the difference in autoantibody binding to the indicated peptides was performed using Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test (*p < 0.05).
Figure 3Factor H (FH) autoantibody binding to single amino acid-substituted recombinant FH short consensus repeat (SCR) domains 19–20 compared to the wild type protein. The amino acid substitutions are indicated on the x axis with capital letters, and numbers marking their location (gray bars) compared to the recombinant wild type FH SCRs 19–20 (striped bar). Binding is expressed in percent relative to that of the wild type (100%, intermittent line). We tested the sera of three patients in the acute phase of atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome; mean and SEM of three independent experiments are shown. Statistical analysis was performed with the one-sample Wilcoxon signed-rank test; statistical significance is indicated by asterisks (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01).
Figure 4Folded structure of complement factor H (FH) short consensus repeat domains 19–20. Panels represent the ribbon model of the molecule obtained from the Protein Data Bank (pdb2g7i). Linear epitopes of the FH autoantibodies are highlighted with orange [amino acid (aa)1157–1171, aa1177–1191, and aa1207–1226], where the initial and final aa of each segment is indicated with black numbers. Arrowheads point toward the C-terminal end of the proteins. (A) The location of the generated point mutations is displayed as colorful spheres on the backbone of the protein, with white numbers indicating their location and colors their effect on autoantibody binding by FH (red: significantly decreased binding when the aa substitutions is present; green: no significant effect on binding). (B) Colorful spheres refer to aa forming the C3b (14, 35) (light blue) and sialic acid (15) (dark blue) binding sites of the molecule. Numbers within the spheres show the location of each aa.