Finally,

XBP-1 regulates IgH transcription indirectly through induction of OBF1, a transcriptional co-activator for IgH [94]. These data seem to point to the hypothesis that activated B cells get prepared to handle high amount of immunoglobulins in a preemptive manner. The presence of misfolded Ig chains amplifies the UPR signalling, but it seems that the pathway is activated before nascent chains appear. We propose a model where Blimp1 expression derepresses XBP1 and the IRE1α/XBP-1 axis is activated in a differentiation-dependent manner. Expression of XBP-1s prepares the cells to handle high levels of Ig synthesis, while misfolded nascent chains amplify the pathway signalling at a later stage. Moreover, expression of ATF6 helps the cell sustain the demands for increased production of antibodies (Fig. 4). So far, this model raises more check details questions than answers. How the differentiation programme triggers the IRE1α/XBP-1 axis? Do cytokines and/or inflammatory millieu interfere with IRE1α/XBP-1 activation? Future data from several groups is awaited with excitement. Meanwhile, it is undeniable that the ability to properly fold and secrete proteins has revealed to CP 690550 be an important

restrictive aspect for the development of both innate and adaptive immune responses. As we learn more about it, it is conceivable to wonder whether we should begin to think about questions such as hypogammaglobulinemia and lymphocyte differentiation as protein folding dynamics issues. The authors thank Drs. Aguinaldo R. Pinto and Laila A. Nahum for critical reading of this manuscript and acknowledge the support 4-Aminobutyrate aminotransferase of the agency FAPESP (09/06529-8 to S.E.A.R. and 09/51326-8 to M.M.D.C.). “
“The immune system is intricately regulated allowing potent effectors to expand and become rapidly mobilized after infection, while simultaneously silencing potentially detrimental responses that averts immune-mediated damage to host tissues. This relies in large part on the delicate interplay between immune suppressive regulatory CD4+ T (Treg) cells and immune effectors that without active suppression by Treg cells cause systemic and organ-specific autoimmunity. Although these beneficial

roles have been classically described as counterbalanced by impaired host defence against infection, newfound protective roles for Treg cells against specific viral pathogens (e.g. herpes simplex virus 2, lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus, West Nile virus) have been uncovered using transgenic mice that allow in vivo Treg-cell ablation based on Foxp3 expression. In turn, Foxp3+ Treg cells also provide protection against some parasitic (Plasmodium sp., Toxoplasma gondii) and fungal (Candida albicans) pathogens. By contrast, for bacterial and mycobacterial infections (e.g. Listeria monocytogenes, Salmonella enterica, Mycobacterium tuberculosis), experimental manipulation of Foxp3+ cells continues to indicate detrimental roles for Treg cells in host defence.