Abstract:GATA transcription factors are major regulators of hematopoietic and immune system. Among GATA factors, GATA-1, GATA-2, and GATA-3 play crucial roles in the development of erythroid cells, hematopoietic stem, and progenitor cells, and T helper type 2 (Th2) cells, respectively. A high level of GATA-1 and GATA-2 expression has been observed in eosinophils, but their roles in eosinophil development remain uncertain both in vitro and in vivo. Here we show that enforced expression of GATA-1 in human primary myeloid… Show more
“…75 Recent studies have shown that even the simple ectopic expression of both PU.1 and C/EBPa within mesenchymal stem cell-derived fibroblasts is sufficient to activate the myeloid program resulting in an induced macrophage-like phenotype capable of phagocytosis. 76 Finally, enforced expression of GATA-1 leads to reprogramming of myeloblasts and CD34 þ bone marrow cells into eosinophils, 77,78 whereas within mouse granulocyte-monocyte progenitors ectopic GATA-1 can reprogram these cells to adopt erythroid, eosinophilic or basophile-like properties. 79 The above-described observations show that PU.1 and GATA-1 act as 'the motors for reprogramming' and this correlation could be very useful with regard to the application of 'differentiation therapy' whereby re-establishing the correct expression of PU.1 and or GATA-1 within immature leukemic cells, or those attempting to mature into an unwanted lineage should reprogram and differentiate these cells back into their respective cellular lineage.…”
Section: Pu1 and Gata-1 Interact During Early Hematopoietic Cell Decmentioning
Hematopoiesis is coordinated by a complex regulatory network of transcription factors and among them PU.1 (Spi1, Sfpi1) represents a key molecule. This review summarizes the indispensable requirement of PU.1 during hematopoietic cell fate decisions and how the function of PU.1 can be modulated by protein-protein interactions with additional factors. The mutual negative regulation between PU.1 and GATA-1 is detailed within the context of normal and leukemogenic hematopoiesis and the concept of 'differentiation therapy' to restore normal cellular differentiation of leukemic cells is discussed.
“…75 Recent studies have shown that even the simple ectopic expression of both PU.1 and C/EBPa within mesenchymal stem cell-derived fibroblasts is sufficient to activate the myeloid program resulting in an induced macrophage-like phenotype capable of phagocytosis. 76 Finally, enforced expression of GATA-1 leads to reprogramming of myeloblasts and CD34 þ bone marrow cells into eosinophils, 77,78 whereas within mouse granulocyte-monocyte progenitors ectopic GATA-1 can reprogram these cells to adopt erythroid, eosinophilic or basophile-like properties. 79 The above-described observations show that PU.1 and GATA-1 act as 'the motors for reprogramming' and this correlation could be very useful with regard to the application of 'differentiation therapy' whereby re-establishing the correct expression of PU.1 and or GATA-1 within immature leukemic cells, or those attempting to mature into an unwanted lineage should reprogram and differentiate these cells back into their respective cellular lineage.…”
Section: Pu1 and Gata-1 Interact During Early Hematopoietic Cell Decmentioning
Hematopoiesis is coordinated by a complex regulatory network of transcription factors and among them PU.1 (Spi1, Sfpi1) represents a key molecule. This review summarizes the indispensable requirement of PU.1 during hematopoietic cell fate decisions and how the function of PU.1 can be modulated by protein-protein interactions with additional factors. The mutual negative regulation between PU.1 and GATA-1 is detailed within the context of normal and leukemogenic hematopoiesis and the concept of 'differentiation therapy' to restore normal cellular differentiation of leukemic cells is discussed.
“…GATA-2 promotes the proliferation and survival of multipotent precursors (2, 3), whereas GATA-1 regulates erythroid, megakaryocyte, and eosinophil differentiation (4)(5)(6)(7). GATA factors engage DNA and coregulators via a dual zinc finger domain (8), and other regions modulate activity (9,10).…”
“…Aunque hay células de la inmunidad innata que producen IL-4 e IL-13, los linfocitos son necesarios para la producción de IgE, pues a través de señales por contacto intercelular (CD40/CD40L) inducen el cambio de isotipo en los linfocitos B hacia la cadena pesada épsilon (16). Los teleósteos, que datan de hace más de 300 millones de años, tienen varios genes que codifican para componentes de la respuesta Th2 (17), así como células efectoras (mastocitos, eosinófilos y basófilos) que se activan frente a ciertos estímulos antigénicos de una manera similar a como lo hacen las de los mamíferos (18), lo cual sugiere que desde la aparición de los peces se dio una respuesta inmunitaria parecida a la que conocemos ahora como alérgica.…”
Section: Algunos Aspectos De La Filogenia De La Respuesta Th2unclassified
“…Los de origen filogenético más ancestral y mejor caracterizados provienen del pez cebra, Danio rerio, especie que se ha convertido en un buen modelo general para estudiar la respuesta inmunológica de los vertebrados. Balla, et al, aislaron eosinófilos de este pez mediante GATA-2, un marcador celular descrito originalmente en los eosinófilos del ratón (18), y observaron que tenían similitud tanto morfológica como de expresión génica con los eosinófilos de mamíferos. Aunque se detectaron transcriptos de genes que se expresan en los gránulos (ARNasas, principalmente), no se hallaron homólogos de otras proteínas de importancia funcional como la proteína básica mayor y la peroxidasa de eosinófilos.…”
Section: Células De La Inmunidad Innataunclassified
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.