OBJECTIVES: We sought to define the clinical features that distinguish DOCK8 deficiency from other forms of HIES and CIDs, study the mutational spectrum of DOCK8 deficiency, and report on the frequency of specific clinical findings.
METHODS: Eighty-two patients from 60 families with CID and the phenotype of AR-HIES with (64 patients) and without (18 patients) DOCK8 mutations were studied. Support vector machines were used to compare clinical data from 35 patients with DOCK8 deficiency with those from 10 patients with AR-HIES without a DOCK8 mutation and 64 patients with signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) mutations.
RESULTS: DOCK8-deficient patients had median IgE levels of 5201 IU, high eosinophil levels of usually at least 800/μL (92% of patients), and low IgM levels (62%). About 20% of patients were lymphopenic, mainly because of low CD4(+) and CD8(+) T-cell counts. Fewer than half of the patients tested produced normal specific antibody responses to recall antigens. Bacterial (84%), viral (78%), and fungal (70%) infections were frequently observed. Skin abscesses (60%) and allergies (73%) were common clinical problems. In contrast to STAT3 deficiency, there were few pneumatoceles, bone fractures, and teething problems. Mortality was high (34%). A combination of 5 clinical features was helpful in distinguishing patients with DOCK8 mutations from those with STAT3 mutations.
CONCLUSIONS: DOCK8 deficiency is likely in patients with severe viral infections, allergies, and/or low IgM levels who have a diagnosis of HIES plus hypereosinophilia and upper respiratory tract infections in the absence of parenchymal lung abnormalities, retained primary teeth, and minimal trauma fractures.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Selective agonists of PKA and EPAC synergistically inhibited Egr1 expression, which was essential for VSMC proliferation. Forskolin, adenosine, A2B receptor agonist BAY60-6583 and Cicaprost also inhibited Egr1 expression in VSMC but not in endothelial cells. Inhibition of Egr1 by cAMP was independent of cAMP response element binding protein (CREB) activity but dependent on inhibition of serum response element (SRE) activity. SRF binding to the Egr1 promoter was not modulated by cAMP stimulation. However, Egr1 expression was dependent on the SRF co-factors Elk1 and 4 but independent of MAL. Inhibition of SRE-dependent Egr1 expression was due to synergistic inhibition of Rac1 activity by PKA and EPAC, resulting in rapid cytoskeleton remodelling and nuclear export of ERK1/2. This was associated with de-phosphorylation of the SRF co-factor Elk1.
CONCLUSION: cAMP inhibits VSMC proliferation by rapidly inhibiting Egr1 expression. This occurs, at least in part, via inhibition of Rac1 activity leading to rapid actin-cytoskeleton remodelling, nuclear export of ERK1/2, impaired Elk1-phosphorylation and inhibition of SRE activity. This identifies one of the earliest mechanisms underlying the anti-mitogenic effects of cAMP in VSMC but not in endothelial cells, making it an attractive target for selective inhibition of VSMC proliferation.