Duffy antigen receptor for chemokines (DARC) and susceptibility to Plasmodium vivax malaria

Kaur, Harpreet; Sehgal, Rakesh; Rani, Sofia

doi:10.1016/j.parint.2019.03.013

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This hypothesis relies heavily on the existence of pathogens that are able to hijack chemokine receptors and use them to enter the cell. Some examples of such pathogens have indeed been identified, such as HIV-1, dengue virus (DENV), Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), and Plasmodium vivax [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]. Although DENV and EBV interactions with chemokine receptors remain somewhat elusive, it is well established that both HIV-1 and Plasmodium vivax interact directly with chemokine receptors in order to infect the cell [4,5,7,10,11].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some examples of such pathogens have indeed been identified, such as HIV-1, dengue virus (DENV), Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), and Plasmodium vivax [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]. Although DENV and EBV interactions with chemokine receptors remain somewhat elusive, it is well established that both HIV-1 and Plasmodium vivax interact directly with chemokine receptors in order to infect the cell [4,5,7,10,11]. Site-directed mutagenesis has shown that HIV infection mainly depends on residues located in extracellular domains of CCR5, such as ECL1-3 and the N-terminus [11,13].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Chemokine receptors are expressed in lymphocytes, neutrophils, dendritic cells, and many other cell types, and play a part in both the innate and adaptive immune responses, being mainly involved in the trafficking of leukocyte populations to a site of injury and/or infection [1]. Additionally, some of these receptors have been deemed as determinants of infectiousness for different pathogens [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]. Most notably, CCR5 and CXCR4 have both been identified as vital co-receptors that mediate human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) entry into human cells [10][11][12][13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evolution of CCR5 and CCR2 Genes in Bats Showed Multiple Independent Gene Conversion Events

Fernandes

Águeda-Pinto

Pinheiro

et al. 2022

Viruses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chemokine receptors are an important determinant for the infectiousness of different pathogens, which are able to target the host cells by binding to the extracellular domains of these proteins. This is the mechanism of infection of HIV-1, among other concerning human diseases. Over the past years, it has been shown that two chemokine receptors, CCR2 and CCR5, have been shaped by events of gene conversion in different mammalian lineages, which has been linked to a possible selective advantage against pathogens. Here, by taking advantage of available bat genomes, we present the first insight of CCR2 and CCR5 evolution within the Chiroptera order. In total, four independent events of recombination between CCR2 and CCR5 were detected: two in a single species, Miniopterus natalensis; one in two species from the Rhinolophoidea superfamily; and one in four species from the Pteropodidae family. The regions affected by the gene conversions were generally extensive and always encompassed extracellular domains. Overall, we demonstrate that CCR2 and CCR5 have been subject to extensive gene conversion in multiple species of bats. Considering that bats are known to be large reservoirs of virus in nature, these results might indicate that chimeric CCR2-CCR5 genes might grant some bat species a selective advantage against viruses that rely in the extracellular portions of either CCR2 or CCR5 as gateways into the cell.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evolution of CCR5 and CCR2 Genes in Bats Showed Multiple Independent Gene Conversion Events

Fernandes

Águeda-Pinto

Pinheiro

et al. 2022

Viruses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such differences may be highly significant, as the contributions of non-leukocytic cell types to protection against infection may be subject to evolutionary imprints from natural pathogens in both species that are at least as strong as those imposed on the innate immunity mediated by professional leukocytes. Classic examples include mutations of the human FUT2 gene conferring protection against intestinal norovirus infections (111); mutations of DARC and G6PD that prevent Plasmodium vivax infection in erythrocytes or reduce replication of this microbe in these cells (112); the sickle cell trait (heterozygosity for the HbS variant), which confers relative resistance to severe forms of P. falciparum malaria (54); and several other genetically encoded malaria-resistance traits phenotypically expressed by erythrocytes or erythrocyte precursors (113)(114)(115). Thus, despite the close relationship between the genomes of humans and mice, significant divergence exists, particularly within clusters of genes associated with immunity to infections.…”

Section: The Mouse and Human Genomes Differ At Immunological Locimentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconciling Mouse and Human Immunology at the Altar of Genetics

Gros

Casanova

2023

Annu. Rev. Immunol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Immunity to infection has been extensively studied in humans and mice bearing naturally occurring or experimentally introduced germline mutations. Mouse studies are sometimes neglected by human immunologists, on the basis that mice are not humans and the infections studied are experimental and not natural. Conversely, human studies are sometimes neglected by mouse immunologists, on the basis of the uncontrolled conditions of study and small numbers of patients. However, both sides would agree that the infectious phenotypes of patients with inborn errors of immunity often differ from those of the corresponding mutant mice. Why is that? We argue that this important question is best addressed by revisiting and reinterpreting the findings of both mouse and human studies from a genetic perspective. Greater caution is required for reverse-genetics studies than for forward-genetics studies, but genetic analysis is sufficiently strong to define the studies likely to stand the test of time. Genetically robust mouse and human studies can provide invaluable complementary insights into the mechanisms of immunity to infection common and specific to these two species. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Immunology, Volume 41 is April 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

show abstract

“…The Duffy glycoprotein, a non-selective receptor, interacts with various chemokines such as interleukin-8 (IL-8) and melanoma growth-stimulating activity (MGSA) in the CXC group, as well as monocyte chemotactic protein-1 (MCP-1) and CCL5 in the CC group [5]. These interactions attract monocytes, memory CD4+ T lymphocytes, and eosinophils.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between Duffy Genotype/Phenotype and Prevalence of Plasmodium vivax Infection: A Systematic Review

Picón-Jaimes,

Lozada-Martinez,

Orozco-Chinome

et al. 2023

TropicalMed

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Duffy protein, a transmembrane molecule, functions as a receptor for various chemokines and facilitates attachment between the reticulocyte and the Plasmodium Duffy antigen-binding protein. Duffy expression correlates with the Duffy receptor gene for the chemokine, located on chromosome 1, and exhibits geographical variability worldwide. Traditionally, researchers have described the Duffy negative genotype as a protective factor against Plasmodium vivax infection. However, recent studies suggest that this microorganism’s evolution could potentially diminish this protective effect. Nevertheless, there is currently insufficient global data to demonstrate this phenomenon. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between the Duffy genotype/phenotype and the prevalence of P. vivax infection. The protocol for the systematic review was registered in PROSPERO as CRD42022353427 and involved reviewing published studies from 2012 to 2022. The Medline/PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and SciELO databases were consulted. Assessments of study quality were conducted using the STROBE and GRADE tools. A total of 34 studies were included, with Africa accounting for the majority of recorded studies. The results varied significantly regarding the relationship between the Duffy genotype/phenotype and P. vivax invasion. Some studies predominantly featured the negative Duffy genotype yet reported no malaria cases. Other studies identified minor percentages of infections. Conversely, certain studies observed a higher prevalence (99%) of Duffy-negative individuals infected with P. vivax. In conclusion, this systematic review found that the homozygous Duffy genotype positive for the A allele (FY*A/*A) is associated with a higher incidence of P. vivax infection. Furthermore, the negative Duffy genotype does not confer protection against vivax malaria.

show abstract

Duffy antigen receptor for chemokines (DARC) and susceptibility to Plasmodium vivax malaria

Cited by 5 publications

References 14 publications

Evolution of CCR5 and CCR2 Genes in Bats Showed Multiple Independent Gene Conversion Events

Evolution of CCR5 and CCR2 Genes in Bats Showed Multiple Independent Gene Conversion Events

Reconciling Mouse and Human Immunology at the Altar of Genetics

Relationship between Duffy Genotype/Phenotype and Prevalence of Plasmodium vivax Infection: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About