Tissue specificity and alternative splicing of the Na+/Ca2+ exchanger isoforms NCX1, NCX2, and NCX3 in rat

1997 ◽  
Vol 272 (4) ◽  
pp. C1250-C1261 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. D. Quednau ◽  
D. A. Nicoll ◽  
K. D. Philipson

The gene coding for the Na+/Ca2+ exchanger NCX1 is characterized by a cluster of six exons (A, B, C, D, E, and F) coding for a variable region in the COOH terminus of the large intracellular loop of the protein. Alternative splicing of these exons generates multiple tissue-specific variants of NCX1. Using reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction, we analyzed eight previously described and four new splicing isoforms of NCX1 in a wide variety of tissues and cells. Exons A and B are mutually exclusive, as shown in earlier studies, and splicing isoforms containing exon A are preferentially expressed in heart, brain, and skeletal muscle, whereas splicing variants with exon B are found in all rat tissues except heart. The second and third isoforms of the Na+/Ca2+ exchanger, NCX2 and NCX3, show a deletion of 37 amino acids in the intracellular loop corresponding to parts of the variable region of NCX1. We identified three splicing isoforms of NCX3 in brain and skeletal muscle by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. These splice variants are generated by including either of two alternative exons equivalent to the NCX1 exon A or B and by including or excluding a sequence equivalent to the NCX1 exon C. We did not detect any alternative splicing of NCX2. We examined selected tissues from neonatal and adult rats and found developmental regulation for NCX1 and NCX3 splicing isoforms in skeletal muscle. Specific isoform patterns were also detected for NCX1 and NCX3 in cultured cortical neurons, astrocytes, and oligodendrocytes. We suggest a new terminology to distinguish the different splice variants of individual NCX isoforms.

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1379.1-1379
Author(s):  
L. Giardullo ◽  
C. Rotondo ◽  
A. Corrado ◽  
N. Maruotti ◽  
R. Colia ◽  
...  

Background:Previous study evidenced a cross-reactivity between Sars-Cov-2 antibodies and autoimmune tissue antigen involved in connective tissue diseases, as nuclear antigen (NA), extractable nuclear antigen (ENA), histone and collagen (1). No study has been published about the titer of Sars-Cov-2 antibodies in non-infected patients with autoimmune disease.Objectives:To evaluate the titer of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in non-COVID-19 patients and compare it between systemic sclerosis (SSc) patients and healthy controls (HC).Methods:A total of 58 patients with SSc (who fulfilled ACR/EULAR 2013 SSc classification criteria) and 18 HC were enrolled. Sera of all participants were collected, and SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (IgG and IgM) were evaluated by means ELISA. In all participants swabs for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction assay were reported negative. Demographic, clinical, and autoimmune serological characteristics of SSc patients were recorded. The normal distribution was assessed using the Shapiro–Wilk’s test. Exclusion criteria was previous or actual Sars-Cov-2 infection. Comparisons between study groups of patients were evaluated by the Student’s t-test or Mann – Whitney U-test as appropriate. The differences between categorial variables were assessed by Pearson chi-square or Fisher’s exact test, as opportune. Statistical significance was set at p ≤ 0.05.Results:We observed significant differences between SSc patients and HC in serum levels of Sars-Cov-2 antibodies (IgG: 1,4±2,1 AU/ml vs 0,36±0,19 AU/ml respectively (p=0,001); and IgM: 2,5±3,1 AU/ml vs 0,8±0,7 AU/ml (p=0,022)). In 5 SSc patients was found titer of Sars-Cov-2 antibodies (IgG) exceeding the cut-off, but the control of swabs for SARS-CoV-2 by real-time reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction assay were negative. No significative differences in Sars-Cov-2 autoantibodies titer were found in subgroup of SSc patients with or without ILD or PAH, limited or diffuse skin subset, and different autoantibodies profile. Furthermore, antibodies titer was not associated with different drugs (steroid, methotrexate, mofetil-mycophenolate and bosentan) in use.Conclusion:A cross mimicking between Sars-Cov-2 antibodies and antinuclear antibodies or anti ENA could be hypothesized. Further studies are necessary to unravel the reliability of Sars-Cov-2 antibodies detection in autoimmune disease.References:[1]Vojdani, A., Vojdani, E., & Kharrazian, D. (2021). Reaction of human monoclonal antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 proteins with tissue antigens: Implications for autoimmune diseases. Frontiers in Immunology, 11, 3679Disclosure of Interests:None declared


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatemeh Khatami ◽  
Mohammad Saatchi ◽  
Seyed Saeed Tamehri Zadeh ◽  
Zahra Sadat Aghamir ◽  
Alireza Namazi Shabestari ◽  
...  

AbstractNowadays there is an ongoing acute respiratory outbreak caused by the novel highly contagious coronavirus (COVID-19). The diagnostic protocol is based on quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and chests CT scan, with uncertain accuracy. This meta-analysis study determines the diagnostic value of an initial chest CT scan in patients with COVID-19 infection in comparison with RT-PCR. Three main databases; PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, and EMBASE were systematically searched for all published literature from January 1st, 2019, to the 21st May 2020 with the keywords "COVID19 virus", "2019 novel coronavirus", "Wuhan coronavirus", "2019-nCoV", "X-Ray Computed Tomography", "Polymerase Chain Reaction", "Reverse Transcriptase PCR", and "PCR Reverse Transcriptase". All relevant case-series, cross-sectional, and cohort studies were selected. Data extraction and analysis were performed using STATA v.14.0SE (College Station, TX, USA) and RevMan 5. Among 1022 articles, 60 studies were eligible for totalizing 5744 patients. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of chest CT scan compared to RT-PCR were 87% (95% CI 85–90%), 46% (95% CI 29–63%), 69% (95% CI 56–72%), and 89% (95% CI 82–96%), respectively. It is important to rely on the repeated RT-PCR three times to give 99% accuracy, especially in negative samples. Regarding the overall diagnostic sensitivity of 87% for chest CT, the RT-PCR testing is essential and should be repeated to escape misdiagnosis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document