You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Review
Citrullination of autoantigens implicates NETosis in the induction of autoimmunity
  1. Nishant Dwivedi1,
  2. Marko Radic2
  1. 1Program in Cellular and Molecular Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
  2. 2Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Biochemistry, University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
  1. Correspondence to Professor Marko Radic, Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Biochemistry, UT Health Science Center, 858 Madison Avenue, rm 211, Memphis, TN 38163, USA; mradic{at}uthsc.edu

Abstract

Tolerance blocks the expression of autoantibodies, whereas autoimmunity promotes it. How tolerance breaks and autoantibody production begins thus are crucial questions for understanding and treatment of autoimmune diseases. Evidence implicates cell death and autoantigen modifications in the initiation of autoimmune reactions. One form of neutrophil cell death called NETosis deserves attention because it requires the post-translational modification of histones and results in the extracellular release of chromatin. NETosis received its name from NET, the acronym given to Neutrophil Extracellular Trap. The extracellular chromatin incorporates histones in which arginines have been converted to citrullines by peptidylarginine deiminase IV (PAD4). The deiminated chromatin may function to capture or ‘trap’ bacterial pathogens, thus generating an extracellular complex of deiminated histones and bacterial cell adjuvants. The complex of bacterial antigens and deiminated chromatin may be internalised by host phagocytes during acute inflammatory conditions, as arise during bacterial infections or chronic autoinflammatory disorders. The uptake and processing of deiminated chromatin together with bacterial adjuvants by phagocytes may induce the presentation of modified histone epitopes and co-stimulation, thus yielding a powerful stimulus to break tolerance. Autoantibodies to deiminated histones are prevalent in Felty's syndrome patients and are present in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). These observations clearly implicate histone deimination as an epigenetic mark that can act as an autoantibody stimulant.

  • Rheumatoid Arthritis
  • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
  • Autoimmunity
  • Ant-CCP

https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203844

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Introduction

    Despite decades of intense research, we do not know the stimuli that trigger the production of autoantibodies in systemic autoimmune diseases.1 The autoantibodies themselves have been studied and found to be useful as diagnostics for different autoimmune diseases. For example, autoantibodies reacting against nuclear antigens, most notably DNA and histones, are a distinguishing feature of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), whereas autoantibodies to a citrullinated cyclic peptide are a reliable diagnostic for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). A plausible prediction is that the careful analysis of autoantibodies will lead to a better understanding of their origins.

    The structure of autoantibodies argues that they are selected for improved binding to autoantigens. The genetic mechanisms that give rise to autoantibodies argue strongly in favour of this conclusion. Autoantibody sequences indicate that even though diverse V genes code for anti-DNA and rheumatoid factor autoantibodies in murine models of SLE and RA, junctional diversity and somatic mutations make essential contributions to binding.2–4 In consequence, only few B cell clones secure conditions for expansion. The expanded autoreactive B cell clones participate in antigen presentation, given that T cell help promotes antibody H chain isotype switching, and selects for mutations that improve antibody binding to autoantigens. As a result, autoantibodies acquire all the molecular hallmarks of affinity maturation, just as antibodies to foreign antigens do.5 Therefore, the identification of molecular features of autoantigens that drive systemic autoimmune diseases holds the key for understanding the pathways that stimulate the production of autoantibodies.

    Cell death and autoimmunity

    Every tissue in the body, including the central nervous system, generates new cells to replace cells that die, and most physiological cell death occurs by apoptosis.6 Apoptosis is an energy-demanding process in which specific enzymes are sequentially activated to cleave hundreds of defined substrates. As a result, large-scale morphologic transitions are induced that disrupt the structure of cell organelles and cell membranes. The condensation of nuclear chromatin and the fragmentation of the nucleus represent some of the most dramatic events of apoptosis. The nuclear fragments separate and punch through the plasma membrane, thus forming protruding blebs at the cell surface.7 Previous work has demonstrated that the exposure of nuclear fragments at the cell surface in apoptosis exposes histones and DNA to the extracellular milieu. The surface exposure of nuclear autoantigens is instrumental in providing access of autoantigens to B cells.8

    Genetic evidence supports the role of apoptosis in the induction of autoimmunity. Various defects of the receptors that function in the clearance of apoptotic cells, or of serum proteins that facilitate the binding and uptake of apoptotic cell remnants, result in an increased risk for developing autoimmunity.9 It stands to reason that normal clearance pathways carried out by macrophage and mediated by innate receptors for apoptotic cells maintain tissue homeostasis in a non-inflammatory manner.

    By contrast, the persistent exposure of nuclear autoantigens on apoptotic cells may stimulate the adaptive immune response to mobilise and clear the excess of apoptotic debris.10 It is interesting that apoptotic cell clearance depends on innate receptors that also function in the recognition of microbial molecular patterns. For example, apoptotic cell clearance is accomplished through binding of the C1q complement protein,11 the serum amyloid P component,12 C-reactive protein,13 milk fat globule protein E814 and pentraxins15 to the surface of apoptotic cells, and the recognition of binding by the Gas6-dependent tyrosine kinase receptors Mer, Axl and Tyro 3.16 ,17 The proper physiological clearance of apoptotic cells is essential for maintaining immunological tolerance. If, due to defects in the normal clearance pathways, B cells are recruited to assist in the clearance of apoptotic cells, the nuclear autoantigens may stimulate innate toll-like receptors expressed in endosomal compartments of B cells.18 ,19 These observations clearly support the view that inadequate clearance of apoptotic debris stimulates the production of antibodies to nuclear antigens. By extension, it could be argued that other forms of cell death also may supply nuclear autoantigens for an adaptive immune response to self. Different cell death pathways are induced by different stimuli and result in the precise execution of evolutionarily conserved steps, including the post-translational modification (PTM) of proteins.

    Post-translational modifications of autoantigens

    Autoantibodies frequently target specific modifications in self-antigens,20 ,21 including PTMs that are introduced during apoptotic cell death.22 ,23 Thus, PTMs may provide a mechanism for converting innocuous self-components into targets of an autoimmune response. PTMs generate ‘neo- epitopes’ (new binding determinants for B or T cell antigen receptors) and, therefore, alter antigen processing and presentation.24 That PTMs play an important role in the induction of autoimmunity is consistent with some of the possible PTMs in histones. Histones, a defining antigen in systemic autoimmune disorders, exhibit PTMs that autoantibodies target.25 Thus, specific histone modifications that arise in apoptosis are recognised by SLE sera.26 A different example is the conversion of arginines in histones to citrullines. The resulting citrullines become nestled in a thicket of other histone PTMs (figure 1). Citrullination, also called deimination, is the work of peptidylarginine deiminases (PADs). PADs are Ca++-dependent enzymes that are conserved in all vertebrates.27 ,28 The conserved nature of PADs implies an important physiological role. Indeed, citrullination regulates zygotic development, the myelination of neurons, and properties of the epidermis.

    Figure 1
    Figure 1

    Post-translational modifications in histones. Sequences of the amino termini of the four core histones are shown to indicate the location of various amino acid modifications. Lysine residues can be acetylated or methylated and there is possibility of two acetyl groups or up to three methyl groups per residue. The trimethylated lysine 27 in H3 is a post-translational modification (PTM) that arises in apoptosis, and that is recognised by lupus autoantibodies.22 Additionally, lysine 15 of H2A can also carry a ubiquitin modification, a mark for DNA damage.118 Phosphorylation of serine and threonine residues is also observed and includes phosphorylated serine 15 in H2B which is another PTM that is induced during apoptosis but does not appear in NETosis.47 The most prominent marks of NETosis are multiple citrullines that replace arginines in H2A, H4 and, most prominently, in H3. The PTM are indicated by symbols that are explained below the diagram. Access the article online to view this figure in colour.

    Notably, although the five PAD isoforms exhibit different tissue distribution, many of their substrates are prominent autoantigens. Table 1 lists autoantigens that are deiminated by PADs and that reside in different tissues or cell compartments. Many of the substrates are components of the extracellular matrix, but others are cytoplasmic or nuclear, depending on their function. Expression of PAD isoforms is similarly heterogeneous.26 Thus, PAD1 is expressed in epidermis where it deiminates keratin and the keratin-associated protein filagrin.29–31 Autoantibodies to citrullinated keratin and citrullinated filaggrin exhibit high specificity for RA.32 In general, anticitrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA) have over 90% specificity and 75% sensitivity for RA, although the percentage of patient sera that react with any particular citrullinated autoantigen ranges widely from over 70% to less than 20%. Therefore, depending on their specific target, ACPA can be used as reliable diagnostic markers for arthritis.33

    View this table:
    Table 1

    List of deiminated autoantigens

    Myelin basic protein (MBP), vimentin and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) are substrates of PAD2, and autoantibodies to MBP arise in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients, and in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis, a mouse model of MS.34 ,35 By contrast, autoantibodies to citrullinated vimentin arise in RA36 and autoantibodies to keratin and trichohyalin, a structural protein of sheath cells in hair follicles, characterise alopecia areata, a disorder exhibiting sudden hair loss.37

    PAD4 is the only PAD that has a nuclear localisation signal, and deiminates histones H2A, H3 and H4.38 ,39 A link exists between PAD4 haplotypes and risk of RA. Alleles linked to an increased susceptibility to RA encode a more stable PAD4 mRNA than alleles that are neutral for RA.40 The increased mRNA stability may lead to increased expression of PAD4 in individuals bearing the susceptible haplotype. An association between deiminated proteins and autoimmune diseases strongly suggests that deimination generates novel epitopes that are able to break tolerance and initiate autoimmune responses.

    PAD4 deimination of nuclear autoantigens

    PAD4 is most abundantly expressed in granulocytes,41 monocytes42 and mast cells.43 PAD4 may associate with cytoplasmic granules, but it also enters the nucleus where it may participate in gene regulation by deiminating histones.38 Deimination transforms a positively charged amino acid (arginine) into a neutral amino acid (citrulline), resulting in the net loss of one positive charge per modified residue.44 Therefore, deimination changes not only the primary sequence of a protein but also its net charge. During the reaction, the guanidino group of arginine is attacked by a Cys residue of PAD4, resulting in the formation of a tetrahedral adduct.45 A nucleophilic attack by a water molecule then cleaves the adduct to form the keto group of citrulline, while releasing ammonia and regenerating the Cys residue of the enzyme.44 ,46 The net result is the conversion of arginine to citrulline with a mass shift of +1 Da.

    The activation of PAD4 in neutrophils is exquisitely sensitive to inflammatory stimuli, such as formylated Met-Leu-Phe peptide (f-MLP), LPS, lipoteichoic acid (LTA) or TNF.47 By contrast, the induction of neutrophil apoptosis blocks PAD4 activation.47 This discovery came as a surprise because numerous reviews and research reports prior to 200847 had proposed that PAD4 is active during neutrophil apoptosis.48 The misconception may, in part, be accounted for by the fact that neutrophils undergo two different forms of cell death. Whereas senescent neutrophils that were not needed to fight an infection die by apoptosis,49 ,50 neutrophils faced with micro-organisms in the course of an infection perform an elaborate form of cell suicide. Those neutrophils die by ejecting nuclear chromatin in order to capture, or ‘trap’, microbial pathogens.51 PAD4 activity precedes and facilitates the release of chromatin from neutrophils.52 In fact, PAD4 is essential for chromatin release and, in the absence of PAD4, the innate response to bacterial infections is impaired.53 Clearly, neutrophil extracellular traps (NET) deserve wider experimental scrutiny because, in infections,54 or in response to adjuvants,55 NETs interpose citrullinated histones with strong immune stimuli. This feature of NETs could be instrumental in breaking tolerance and inducing an autoimmune response to chromatin antigens. Nonetheless, work in NADPH oxidase-deficient MRL.Fas(lpr) mice suggests that, in that model of lupus, NETs are not required for autoimmunity.55a

    Neutrophil extracelluar traps and autoimmunity

    Remarkable progress has been achieved in understanding pathways that regulate NETosis, the unique form of cell death that leads to the release of chromatin NETs.56 ,57 Particular attention has centred on signalling pathways that carry out the massive cellular reorganisation that is required for NET release. Signals from the cell surface, originating with innate pattern recognition receptors58 and integrins,59 are transmitted via protein kinase C (PKC),60 ,61 and result in the generation of reactive oxygen species. Signals activate PAD4 in the nucleus and at cytoplasmic hotspots, leading to chromatin decondensation, nuclear envelope breakdown, and mixing of chromatin with cytoplasmic and granule contents.47 ,62

    Figure 2 outlines proposed steps in the transmission of signals that regulate NETosis. Microbes, including bacteria, fungi or viruses interact with cell surface receptors, whose downstream signals lead to a transient increase of cytoplasmic calcium.63 This, in turn, activates PKC64 and extracellular signal-activated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2).60 ERK1/2 leads to the activation of the p47 subunit of NADP oxidase,65 followed by the assembly of an active oxidase complex. The result is reactive oxygen production and perchlorate formation.66 Pathogen-associated molecules, such as lipopolysaccharide (LPS), may act via toll-like receptors and activate the nuclear factor kappa B (NFκB) pathways.67 Tumour progression locus 2 (TLP2) is a candidate kinase that could promote activation of ERK1/2 in this scenario.68 Converging pro-NETosis signals favour neutrophil granule and nuclear envelope disassembly, thus allowing association between granule components such as myeloperoxidase (MPO) and neutrophil elastase (NE) with nuclear chromatin.69 These enzymes, among other NET components, associate with the unravelling chromatin and acquire additional extracellular functions. PAD4, itself regulated by opposing PKC subunits,61 plays an essential role in the decondensation of chromatin and the subsequent release of NETs.53

    Figure 2
    Figure 2

    Proposed steps in the transmission of signals from the cell surface to the nucleus in NETosis. Events that lead to the release of NET chromatin from the cell, likely induced by bacteria, fungi or viruses, may initiate with interactions with cell surface receptors that activate phospholipase C γ (PLCγ) and transiently elevate the cytoplasmic calcium levels. This, in turn, activates protein kinase C (PKC) isoforms that regulate peptidylarginine deiminase 4 (PAD4) and extracellular signal-activated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2). ERK1/2 may phosphorylate and activate the p47 subunit of NADP oxidase, thus favouring the assembly of the active multisubunit complex whose reactive oxygen production and associated perchlorate formation exerts extracellular and intracellular functions. Soluble pathogen-associated molecules such as lipopolysaccharide (LPS) bind toll-like receptors (TLR) and activate the MyD88 signalling pathway. The tumour progression locus 2 (TLP2) may connect the TLR-NFkappaB pathway to the activation of ERK1/2. Neutrophil granules disintegrate and release myeloperoxidase (MPO) and neutrophil elastase (NE) into the cytoplasm where they associate with the unravelling chromatin. PAD4 appears to play an essential role in the decondensation of chromatin and the subsequent release of NETs. Access the article online to view this figure in colour.

    Alternative forms of NETs may consist of mitochondrial DNA70 or be released from a novel type of vesicles containing nuclear chromatin.71 Notable differences may exist between these NET variations. Differences may include different speeds of NET deployment, directionality of NET release, and active neutrophil chemotaxis during—and after—NET expulsion. In the ‘classic’ form of NETosis, decondensed nuclear chromatin associates with MPO and elastase,69 along with defensin peptides, such as LL37,72 before it is released from the cell. The released chromatin brings benefits in responses to bacteria,51 ,73 ,74 fungi75 and viruses.76 Reports show that in vitro NETs are capable of attaching and damaging microbes, and studies in mouse models show that the deployment of NETs is beneficial to the organism.53 ,76 However, uncontrolled NET production that can also be induced by sterile inflammation in chronic inflammatory disorders has quite serious consequences.

    That NETs may stimulate autoimmunity follows from the fact that autoantibodies target various NET components. Autoantibodies from patients with systemic autoimmunity recognise innate immune defence proteins, including the major NET components: elastase, cathepsin G and proteinase 3,77–79 as well as bactericidal peptides that are stored in granules and co-purify with NETs, such as neutrophil defensins and the LL37 peptide.80 ,81 The autoantibody targets that arise in NETosis were summarised by Darrah and Andrade.82 Khandpur and colleagues convincingly demonstrated that NETs are a primary source of deiminated autoantigens, and that RA neutrophils are more susceptible than osteoarthritis neutrophils to NETosis.83 NETs stimulate inflammatory responses, including the increased expression of adhesion molecules, cytokines and chemokines.83 Separate studies indicate an increased abundance of activated neutrophils and elevated concentrations of neutrophil granule components in the sera of patients with more advanced disease.77 ,84 Additionally, the severity of lupus also correlates with the titres of anti-NET autoantibodies.85 Thus, lupus autoantibodies bind NET-associated proteins, in addition to histones and DNA, the NETs’ structural scaffold.

    Other studies directly point to neutrophil activation as a key factor in the stimulation of autoantibodies. As discovered in studies involving juvenile lupus participants, SLE neutrophils show an exacerbated response to lupus autoantibody complexes.86 In turn, NETs may persist for a longer time in autoimmunity, as SLE patients’ anti-DNA antibodies protect NETs from degradation by nucleases.85 Persistent NETs may aggravate inflammation by stimulating plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDC) to release cytokines such as interferon type I.81 ,86 Recent data implicate the binding of anti-PAD4 autoantibodies with the enzymatic activation of the deiminase,87 thus arguing for a likely extracellular role of PAD4. In the extracellular milieu, PAD4 activation may yield citrullinated forms of fibrinogen, fibronectin, collagen and other matrix proteins that have been linked with manifestations of connective tissue inflammation (table 1). Deimination of myelin basic protein, most likely by PAD2 or PAD4, may participate in the pathogenesis of neuro-degenerative disorders.88

    Studies that report a benefit from inhibitors of PAD4 in mouse models of systemic autoimmunity deserve special attention. First, in the collagen-induced arthritis model, inhibition of PAD4 by Cl-amidine improved quantifiable disease manifestations.89 Subsequently, PAD4 inhibition by Cl-amidine was used to treat NZM 2328 mice, a reliable mouse model of lupus.90 The drug was administered to mice over a period of 3 months without adverse effects, and the treatment inhibited NET formation and specifically decreased anti-DNA titres without measurably affecting serum antibody isotypes. Additionally, Cl-amidine reduced MPO and immune complex deposition in the kidneys of NZM mice and improved endothelial cell differentiation and vasorelaxation, while reducing the risk of arterial thrombosis.90 Similarly, amelioration of neurodegenerative symptoms was reported in a mouse model of MS, following administration of a novel deiminase inhibitor.91

    Together, these findings suggest that, in autoimmune disorders, NETosis may be more easily triggered, NETs may induce the production of anti-NET antibodies, and the NET antigens may persist in tissues because they are protected by autoantibodies. Thus, NET antigens and anti-NET autoantibodies may be linked in a pernicious pathogenic cycle.

    Induction of histone deimination by bacterial infections

    Diverse bacterial and fungal infections trigger NET release.92 NETosis is induced by neutrophil encounter with Staphylococcus aureus51 or Mycobacterium tuberculosis93 and in response to exposure to Candida albicans75 ,94 and Aspergillus fumigatus.95 ,96 NETs function in trapping and damaging micro-organisms, and this explains how extracellular nucleases produced by bacteria function as virulence factors.97 The release of NETs is linked to various clinical complications of infectious diseases, including bacterial sepsis98 ,99 and the increased risk of thrombosis.100 Interestingly, more serious infections and blood clots are known as complications in a number of autoimmune disorders.101 These complications could be linked, in part, to the inopportune release of NETs from autoimmune patient neutrophils.

    To explore the neutrophil response to infections, we used an animal model. The mouse peritoneum is a suitable environment for S aureus, as the bacterium rapidly divides in the murine peritoneal cavity. To test the induction of histone deimination in vivo, we injected 109 colony-forming units of S aureus in PBS or PBS alone into mice. After 1 h of incubation, the peritoneal fluid was collected and filtered through a 0.22 µm filter to remove intact bacteria and mouse cells. The filtrate contained NET fragments generated in vivo. Figure 3A shows that histone deimination and NET release had occurred in mice injected with the bacterial pathogen but not in those receiving vehicle alone. The rapid release of histones containing citrullines may occur via the recently described rapid release of vessiculated chromatin from neutrophils.71 Our results confirm that a wide range of infections elicit the production of deiminated histones and their release from the cell in the form of chromatin traps.

    Figure 3
    Figure 3

    Neutrophil activation in response to infection and crystals. (A) Deiminated histones are present in peritoneal lavage fluids collected from Staphylococcus aureus injected mice. Peritoneum from mice injected with 109 CFU of S aureus was flushed and collected. After filtration through 0.22 um filter, the lavage fluid was run on a 12% SDS PAGE gel, blotted to a membrane and probed with rabbit antideiminated H3 antibody to detect the presence of free deiminated histones. (B) Quantitation of NETs induced by crystals. Human neutrophils (100 000/well) were distributed to a 96-well polypropylene plate and treated with monosodium urate (MSU) (200 ug/mL), Alum (150 µg/mL) and H2O2 (1 mM) for 2 h at 37°C. At the end of incubation sytox orange was added to a final concentration of 1.66 uM, and fluorescence was measured (excitation at 535 nm and emission at 595) on a fluorimeter. The experiment was done at least three times, and triplicate values from one experiment are plotted. Error bars indicate SD from mean values.

    Sterile inflammation leads to histone deimination

    A wide range of inflammatory stimuli induce histone deimination and NETosis,47 hence NETosis can proceed in the absence of an infection. To test additional sterile inflammatory conditions that lead to deimination of histones by PAD4, we activated PAD4 with compounds associated with sterile inflammation. Monosodium urate (MSU), a byproduct of nucleic acid metabolism, is associated with the chronic autoinflammatory disorder of gout.102 MSU elicits sterile inflammation by forming crystals in articular joints of individuals afflicted by gouty arthritis. The crystals activate the inflammasome and result in the release of interleukin 1β.103 Due to the persistent inflammation, bone damage, erosion and remodelling ensue.

    Aluminium hydroxide, a substance that is widely used as an adjuvant in vaccines, provides an alternative stimulus that can induce NETosis and histone deimination in the absence of an infection.55 To test the production of NETs from neutrophils that were exposed to MSU or alum, we developed an in vitro assay in which released chromatin is quantified by using a cell-impermeable DNA dye, Sytox Orange, and we measured the chromatin in the supernatant of cells by fluorometry. As control, we used hydrogen peroxide, a strong inducer of NETs and histone deimination.47 Figure 3B illustrates that MSU and aluminium hydroxide were potent stimuli of NET release, suggesting that the pathogenic mechanism in gout involves the intra-articular activation of neutrophils, along with the release of NETs containing deiminated histones. It is therefore likely that sterile inflammatory disorders, such as gout, elicit the extracellular release of deiminated histones from neutrophils.104 ,105 Under these conditions, the epigenetic histone modification may break tolerance and lead to B cell autoreactivity.

    Autoantibodies to deiminated histones

    If NETs are the source of disease-associated autoantigens, then autoantibodies from patients with systemic autoimmunity should bind to NETs more avidly than control sera. In addition, NETs would be predicted to contain unique targets for autoantibodies that are absent from unstimulated neutrophils. Indeed, we found prominent NET autoreactivity (figure 4) in the sera from patients with SLE, RA and Felty's syndrome (FS). FS shares features of SLE and RA and is defined by the triad of severe arthritis, splenomegaly and neutropenia.106 All three disorders are characterised by the production of antihistone autoantibodies.107 ,108 FS arises in 1–3% of RA patients after an extended period of incompletely mitigated disease.109 ,110 FS patients experience severe destructive arthritis and develop extra-articular manifestations, including rheumatic nodules and vasculitis.111

    Figure 4
    Figure 4

    Autoimmune sera react with neutrophil extracellular traps. Neutrophils from non-autoimmune human donors were purified by density gradient centrifugation and incubated in Hanks balanced salt solution (panels A and C), or stimulated with lipopolysaccharide (LPS) (panels B and D). Cells were incubated on microscope cover slips for 2 h and then processed for immunofluorescence confocal microscopy, as previously described.47 In panels A and B, the cells were incubated with a systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) serum, whereas, the cells in panels C and D were incubated with Felty's syndrome (FS) serum. The serum reactivities with NETs and deiminated histones were characterised by Dwivedi et al.106 DNA is shown in blue, IgG binding in red, and the plasma membrane in green. Antibodies react preferentially with LPS-treated neutrophils that have released extracellular chromatin.

    Experiments suggest that neutropenia in FS is due to autoimmune aetiology rather than a production defect. In mice infused with the sera or isolated immune complexes of FS patients, neutrophil counts drop precipitously, suggesting autoimmunity as the mechanism.112 Immune complexes and soluble antibodies from FS patients bind neutrophils and mediate their sequestration in the spleen.113 The spleen of FS patients exhibits an expansion of red pulp, sinus hyperplasia, macrophage infiltration and prominent germinal centres.114 These hallmarks of increased splenic activity indicate that clearance of activated neutrophils by the spleen may promote FS. Interruption of the self-sustaining autoreactivity by removal of the patient's spleen restores neutrophil counts, arguing that the spleen provides a sink for neutrophils in FS.114 Thus, it is reasonable to argue that autoantibodies against neutrophil antigens in FS drive neutropenia by splenic sequestration of neutrophils. To understand FS, it will be important to identify the neutrophil targets of autoantibodies.

    There are three parameters that suggest a possible pathogenic mechanism. FS patients score positive for binding to the cyclic citrullinated peptide, a screening test that identifies 77% of FS patients.115 ,116 Additionally, a remarkably high percentage of FS patients have autoantibodies to histones, and reports indicate that over 80% of FS sera contain antihistone IgG.108 The sequestration of activated neutrophils in the spleen may, over time, induce autoantibody production. Because we hypothesised that stimulation of neutrophils in FS would lead to PAD4 activation and histone deimination, and because FS patients make antihistone antibodies, we decided to test FS patient sera for IgG to deiminated histones.106

    To test for the presence of antibodies to deiminated histones, we reacted histones from calf thymus with recombinant PAD4 to completion. ELISA and immunoblotting with deiminated and non-deiminated histones revealed autoantibody preference for deiminated histones in a majority of FS patients and in a subset of SLE and RA patients.106 Deiminated H3 was the major target autoantigen, although binding to other histones, H4 and H1, was also observed. A control group of patients with antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis-expressed antibodies that bound non-deiminated histones with preference over deiminated histones. This confirmed that the selection of autoantibody targets depends on the pathogenic process and may differ between autoimmune disorders. After our study was published, Pratesi et al117 identified citrullinated histone H4 as a specific autoantibody target in a majority of RA sera. In their study, deiminated histones were prepared from calcium ionophore-treated neutrophils, and reactivity was confirmed by immunoprecipitation and mass spectrometry.

    Autoantibodies to deiminated histones, antigens that are produced during neutrophil activation, represent strong evidence that NETs contribute to autoimmunity in FS and SLE. Because neutrophils are involved in responses to infections, our findings also suggest a molecular link between chronic infections and autoimmunity. Neutrophil activation and NET formation are also induced by inflammatory cytokines, suggesting how one might arrive at a positive feedback loop that is the hallmark of autoimmune disorders.

    Model of autoimmune pathogenesis in Felty's syndrome

    Based on the biological properties of neutrophils, our data on the incidence of autoantibodies to deiminated histones, and the disease progression in FS, we propose the following model of FS pathogenesis (figure 5). The diagram connects the clinical observations that characterise FS, for example the pre-existing arthritis, neutropenia, splenomegaly and an increased incidence of infections, with the neutrophil response to infections and inflammation. In these circumstances, neutrophils induce histone deimination and expel chromatin from the cell. NETs containing deiminated histones, in complex with bacterial adjuvants, are the most likely antigenic trigger to account for the production of autoantibodies to the modified histones. These autoantibodies, similar to other antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies (ANCA), may further stimulate neutrophils, thus completing a cycle that is self-sustaining and drives depletion of mature neutrophils. What factors break tolerance to deiminated histones in FS remains to be determined. Yet, the increased severity of FS as compared to RA, with its rapidly progressing arthritis, extra-articular manifestations and life-threatening neutropenia, clearly indicate the need to identify the role of NETosis in the pathogenic mechanisms of FS.

    Figure 5
    Figure 5

    A model of potential factors involved in autoimmune pathogenesis of Felty's syndrome. Factors that may contribute toward the development of anti-NET autoantibodies are discussed in the text, and hypothetical interactions are shown.

    References

    1. 1.↵
      1. Radic M,
      2. Herrmann M,
      3. van der Vlag J,
      4. et al
      . Regulatory and pathogenetic mechanisms of autoantibodies in SLE. Autoimmunity 2011;44:349–56.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    2. 2.↵
      1. Shlomchik MJ,
      2. Marshak-Rothstein A,
      3. Wolfowicz CB,
      4. et al
      . The role of clonal selection and somatic mutation in autoimmunity. Nature 1987;328:805–11.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    3. 3.↵
      1. Shlomchik MJ,
      2. Aucoin AH,
      3. Pisetsky DS,
      4. et al
      . Structure and function of anti-DNA autoantibodies derived from a single autoimmune mouse. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1987;84:9150–4.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    4. 4.↵
      1. Shlomchik M,
      2. Mascelli M,
      3. Shan H,
      4. et al
      . Anti-DNA antibodies from autoimmune mice arise by clonal expansion and somatic mutation. J Exp Med 1990;171:265–92.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    5. 5.↵
      1. Radic MZ,
      2. Weigert M
      . Genetic and structural evidence for antigen selection of anti-DNA antibodies. Annu Rev Immunol 1994;12:487–520.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    6. 6.↵
      1. Cline AM,
      2. Radic MZ
      . Apoptosis, subcellular particles, and autoimmunity. Clin Immunol 2004;112:175–82.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    7. 7.↵
      1. Cocca BA,
      2. Cline AM,
      3. Radic MZ
      . Blebs and apoptotic bodies are B cell autoantigens. J Immunol 2002;169:159–66.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    8. 8.↵
      1. Radic M,
      2. Marion T,
      3. Monestier M
      . Nucleosomes are exposed at the cell surface in apoptosis. J Immunol 2004;172:6692–700.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    9. 9.↵
      1. Radic M,
      2. Cocca BA,
      3. Cline AM
      . Apoptosis in the induction of autoimmunity. In: Zouali M, ed. Frontiers in autoimmunity: fundamental aspects and clinical perspectives. Amsterdam IOS Press, 2003:144–67.
    10. 10.↵
      1. Savill J,
      2. Dransfield I,
      3. Gregory C,
      4. et al
      . A blast from the past: clearance of apoptotic cells regulates immune responses. Nat Rev Immunol 2002;2:965–75.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    11. 11.↵
      1. Ogden CA,
      2. deCathelineau A,
      3. Hoffmann PR,
      4. et al
      . C1q and mannose binding lectin engagement of cell surface calreticulin and CD91 initiates macropinocytosis and uptake of apoptotic cells. J Exp Med 2001;194:781–95.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    12. 12.↵
      1. Familian A,
      2. Zwart B,
      3. Huisman HG,
      4. et al
      . Chromatin-independent binding of serum amyloid P component to apoptotic cells. J Immunol 2001;167:647–54.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    13. 13.↵
      1. Du Clos TW,
      2. Zlock LT,
      3. Marnell L
      . Definition of a C-reactive protein binding determinant on histones. J Biol Chem 1991;266:2167–71.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    14. 14.↵
      1. Asano K,
      2. Miwa M,
      3. Miwa K,
      4. et al
      . Masking of phosphatidylserine inhibits apoptotic cell engulfment and induces autoantibody production in mice. J Exp Med 2004;200:459–67.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    15. 15.↵
      1. Baruah P,
      2. Propato A,
      3. Dumitriu IE,
      4. et al
      . The pattern recognition receptor PTX3 is recruited at the synapse between dying and dendritic cells, and edits the cross-presentation of self, viral, and tumor antigens. Blood 2006;107:151–8.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    16. 16.↵
      1. Nakano T,
      2. Ishimoto Y,
      3. Kishino J,
      4. et al
      . Cell adhesion to phosphatidylserine mediated by a product of growth arrest-specific gene 6. J Biol Chem 1997;272:29411–14.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    17. 17.↵
      1. Lemke G,
      2. Rothlin CV
      . Immunobiology of the TAM receptors. Nat Rev Immunol 2008;8:327–36.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    18. 18.↵
      1. Leadbetter EA,
      2. Rifkin IR,
      3. Hohlbaum AM,
      4. et al
      . Chromatin-IgG complexes activate B cells by dual engagement of IgM and Toll-like receptors. Nature 2002;416:603–7.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    19. 19.↵
      1. Rifkin IR,
      2. Leadbetter EA,
      3. Busconi L,
      4. et al
      . Toll-like receptors, endogenous ligands, and systemic autoimmune disease. Immunol Rev 2005;204:27–42.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    20. 20.↵
      1. Doyle HA,
      2. Mamula MJ
      . Posttranslational protein modifications: new flavors in the menu of autoantigens. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2002;14:244–9.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    21. 21.↵
      1. Doyle HA,
      2. Mamula MJ
      . Posttranslational modifications of self-antigens. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2005;1050:1–9.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    22. 22.↵
      1. van Bavel CC,
      2. Dieker JW,
      3. Kroeze Y,
      4. et al
      . Apoptosis-induced histone H3 methylation is targeted by autoantibodies in systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:201–7.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    23. 23.↵
      1. Schachna L,
      2. Wigley FM,
      3. Morris S,
      4. et al
      . Recognition of Granzyme B-generated autoantigen fragments in scleroderma patients with ischemic digital loss. Arthritis Rheum 2002;46:1873–84.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    24. 24.↵
      1. Ohmori H,
      2. Kanayama N
      . Immunogenicity of an inflammation-associated product, tyrosine nitrated self-proteins. Autoimmun Rev 2005;4:224–9.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    25. 25.↵
      1. Dieker J,
      2. Muller S
      . Epigenetic histone code and autoimmunity. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol 2010;39:78–84.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    26. 26.↵
      1. van Bavel CC,
      2. Dieker JW,
      3. Tamboer WP,
      4. et al
      . Lupus-derived monoclonal autoantibodies against apoptotic chromatin recognize acetylated conformational epitopes. Mol Immunol 2010;48:248–56.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    27. 27.↵
      1. Chavanas S,
      2. Mechin MC,
      3. Takahara H,
      4. et al
      . Comparative analysis of the mouse and human peptidylarginine deiminase gene clusters reveals highly conserved non-coding segments and a new human gene, PADI6. Gene 2004;330:19–27.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    28. 28.↵
      1. Vossenaar ER,
      2. Zendman AJ,
      3. van Venrooij WJ,
      4. et al
      . PAD, a growing family of citrullinating enzymes: genes, features and involvement in disease. Bioessays 2003;25:1106–18.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    29. 29.↵
      1. Senshu T,
      2. Akiyama K,
      3. Kan S,
      4. et al
      . Detection of deiminated proteins in rat skin: probing with a monospecific antibody after modification of citrulline residues. J Invest Dermatol 1995;105:163–9.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    30. 30.↵
      1. Senshu T,
      2. Kan S,
      3. Ogawa H,
      4. et al
      . Preferential deimination of keratin K1 and filaggrin during the terminal differentiation of human epidermis. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 1996;225:712–19.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    31. 31.↵
      1. Senshu T,
      2. Akiyama K,
      3. Nomura K
      . Identification of citrulline residues in the V subdomains of keratin K1 derived from the cornified layer of newborn mouse epidermis. Exp Dermatol 1999;8:392–401.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    32. 32.↵
      1. Girbal-Neuhauser E,
      2. Durieux JJ,
      3. Arnaud M,
      4. et al
      . The epitopes targeted by the rheumatoid arthritis-associated antifilaggrin autoantibodies are posttranslationally generated on various sites of (pro)filaggrin by deimination of arginine residues. J Immunol 1999;162:585–94.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    33. 33.↵
      1. Sebbag M,
      2. Chapuy-Regaud S,
      3. Auger I,
      4. et al
      . Clinical and pathophysiological significance of the autoimmune response to citrullinated proteins in rheumatoid arthritis. Joint Bone Spine 2004;71:493–502.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    34. 34.↵
      1. Chamczuk AJ,
      2. Ursell M,
      3. O'Connor P,
      4. et al
      . A rapid ELISA-based serum assay for myelin basic protein in multiple sclerosis. J Immunol Methods 2002;262:21–7.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    35. 35.↵
      1. Reindl M,
      2. Linington C,
      3. Brehm U,
      4. et al
      . Antibodies against the myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein and the myelin basic protein in multiple sclerosis and other neurological diseases: a comparative study. Brain 1999;122:(Pt 11):2047–56.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    36. 36.↵
      1. Vossenaar ER,
      2. Despres N,
      3. Lapointe E,
      4. et al
      . Rheumatoid arthritis specific anti-Sa antibodies target citrullinated vimentin. Arthritis Res Ther 2004;6:R142–50.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    37. 37.↵
      1. Tobin DJ
      . Characterization of hair follicle antigens targeted by the anti-hair follicle immune response. J Investig Dermatol Symp Proc 2003;8:176–81.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    38. 38.↵
      1. Nakashima K,
      2. Hagiwara T,
      3. Yamada M
      . Nuclear localization of peptidylarginine deiminase V and histone deimination in granulocytes. J Biol Chem 2002;277:49562–8.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    39. 39.↵
      1. Hagiwara T,
      2. Nakashima K,
      3. Hirano H,
      4. et al
      . Deimination of arginine residues in nucleophosmin/B23 and histones in HL-60 granulocytes. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2002;290:979–83.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    40. 40.↵
      1. Suzuki A,
      2. Yamada R,
      3. Chang X,
      4. et al
      . Functional haplotypes of PADI4, encoding citrullinating enzyme peptidylarginine deiminase 4, are associated with rheumatoid arthritis. Nat Genet 2003;34:395–402.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    41. 41.↵
      1. Asaga H,
      2. Nakashima K,
      3. Senshu T,
      4. et al
      . Immunocytochemical localization of peptidylarginine deiminase in human eosinophils and neutrophils. J Leukoc Biol 2001;70:46–51.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    42. 42.↵
      1. Vossenaar ER,
      2. Radstake TR,
      3. van der Heijden A,
      4. et al
      . Expression and activity of citrullinating peptidylarginine deiminase enzymes in monocytes and macrophages. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:373–81.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    43. 43.↵
      1. von Kockritz-Blickwede M,
      2. Goldmann O,
      3. Thulin P,
      4. et al
      . Phagocytosis-independent antimicrobial activity of mast cells by means of extracellular trap formation. Blood 2008;111:3070–80.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    44. 44.↵
      1. Knuckley B,
      2. Bhatia M,
      3. Thompson PR
      . Protein arginine deiminase 4: evidence for a reverse protonation mechanism. Biochemistry 2007;46:6578–87.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    45. 45.↵
      1. Arita K,
      2. Shimizu T,
      3. Hashimoto H,
      4. et al
      . Structural basis for histone N-terminal recognition by human peptidylarginine deiminase 4. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2006;103:5291–6.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    46. 46.↵
      1. Ke Z,
      2. Zhou Y,
      3. Hu P,
      4. et al
      . Active site cysteine is protonated in the PAD4 Michaelis complex: evidence from Born-Oppenheimer ab initio QM/MM molecular dynamics simulations. J Phys Chem B 2009;113:12750–8.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    47. 47.↵
      1. Neeli I,
      2. Khan SN,
      3. Radic M
      . Histone deimination as a response to inflammatory stimuli in neutrophils. J Immunol 2008;180:1895–902.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    48. 48.↵
      1. Szodoray P,
      2. Szabo Z,
      3. Kapitany A,
      4. et al
      . Anti-citrullinated protein/peptide autoantibodies in association with genetic and environmental factors as indicators of disease outcome in rheumatoid arthritis. Autoimmun Rev 2010;9:140–3.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    49. 49.↵
      1. Lum JJ,
      2. Bren G,
      3. McClure R,
      4. et al
      . Elimination of senescent neutrophils by TNF-related apoptosis-inducing [corrected] ligand. J Immunol 2005;175:1232–8.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    50. 50.↵
      1. Furze RC,
      2. Rankin SM
      . The role of the bone marrow in neutrophil clearance under homeostatic conditions in the mouse. FASEB J 2008;22:3111–19.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    51. 51.↵
      1. Brinkmann V,
      2. Reichard U,
      3. Goosmann C,
      4. et al
      . Neutrophil extracellular traps kill bacteria. Science 2004;303:1532–5.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    52. 52.↵
      1. Wang Y,
      2. Li M,
      3. Stadler S,
      4. et al
      . Histone hypercitrullination mediates chromatin decondensation and neutrophil extracellular trap formation. J Cell Biol 2009;184:205–13.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    53. 53.↵
      1. Li P,
      2. Li M,
      3. Lindberg MR,
      4. et al
      . PAD4 is essential for antibacterial innate immunity mediated by neutrophil extracellular traps. J Exp Med 2010;207:1853–62.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    54. 54.↵
      1. Brinkmann V,
      2. Zychlinsky A
      . Beneficial suicide: why neutrophils die to make NETs. Nat Rev Microbiol 2007;5:577–82.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    55. 55.↵
      1. Munks MW,
      2. McKee AS,
      3. Macleod MK,
      4. et al
      . Aluminum adjuvants elicit fibrin-dependent extracellular traps in vivo. Blood 2010;116:5191–9.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    56. 55a.↵
      1. Campbell AM,
      2. Kashgarian M,
      3. Shlomchik M
      . NADPH oxidase inhibits the pathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus. Sci Transl Med 2012;4:157ra141.f
      OpenUrl
    57. 56.↵
      1. Brinkmann V,
      2. Zychlinsky A
      . Neutrophil extracellular traps: is immunity the second function of chromatin? J Cell Biol 2012;198:773–83.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    58. 57.↵
      1. Kaplan MJ,
      2. Radic M
      . Neutrophil extracellular traps: double-edged swords of innate immunity. J Immunol 2012;189:2689–95.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    59. 58.↵
      1. Yipp BG,
      2. Petri B,
      3. Salina D,
      4. et al
      . Infection-induced NETosis is a dynamic process involving neutrophil multitasking in vivo. Nat Med 2012;18:1386–93.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    60. 59.↵
      1. Neeli I,
      2. Dwivedi N,
      3. Khan S,
      4. et al
      . Regulation of extracellular chromatin release from neutrophils. J Innate Immun 2009;1:194–201.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    61. 60.↵
      1. Hakkim A,
      2. Fuchs TA,
      3. Martinez NE,
      4. et al
      . Activation of the Raf-MEK-ERK pathway is required for neutrophil extracellular trap formation. Nat Chem Biol 2011;7:75–7.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    62. 61.↵
      1. Neeli I,
      2. Radic M
      . Opposition between PKC isoforms regulates histone deimination and neutrophil extracellular chromatin release. Front Immunol 2013;4:38.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    63. 62.↵
      1. Fuchs TA,
      2. Abed U,
      3. Goosmann C,
      4. et al
      . Novel cell death program leads to neutrophil extracellular traps. J Cell Biol 2007;176:231–41.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    64. 63.↵
      1. Goldmann O,
      2. Medina E
      . The expanding world of extracellular traps: not only neutrophils but much more. Front Immunol 2012;3:420.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    65. 64.↵
      1. Steinberg SF
      . Structural basis of protein kinase C isoform function. Physiol Rev 2008;88:1341–78.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    66. 65.↵
      1. Makni-Maalej K,
      2. Chiandotto M,
      3. Hurtado-Nedelec M,
      4. et al
      . Zymosan induces NADPH oxidase activation in human neutrophils by inducing the phosphorylation of p47phox and the activation of Rac2: involvement of protein tyrosine kinases, PI3Kinase, PKC, ERK1/2 and p38MAPkinase. Biochem Pharmacol 2013;85:92–100.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    67. 66.↵
      1. Winterbourn CC
      . Reconciling the chemistry and biology of reactive oxygen species. Nat Chem Biol 2008;4:278–86.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    68. 67.↵
      1. Clark SR,
      2. Ma AC,
      3. Tavener SA,
      4. et al
      . Platelet TLR4 activates neutrophil extracellular traps to ensnare bacteria in septic blood. Nat Med 2007;13:463–9.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    69. 68.↵
      1. Dumitru CD,
      2. Ceci JD,
      3. Tsatsanis C,
      4. et al
      . TNF-alpha induction by LPS is regulated posttranscriptionally via a Tpl2/ERK-dependent pathway. Cell 2000;103:1071–83.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    70. 69.↵
      1. Papayannopoulos V,
      2. Metzler KD,
      3. Hakkim A,
      4. et al
      . Neutrophil elastase and myeloperoxidase regulate the formation of neutrophil extracellular traps. J Cell Biol 2010;191:677–91.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    71. 70.↵
      1. Yousefi S,
      2. Mihalache C,
      3. Kozlowski E,
      4. et al
      . Viable neutrophils release mitochondrial DNA to form neutrophil extracellular traps. Cell Death Differ 2009;16:1438–44.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    72. 71.↵
      1. Pilsczek FH,
      2. Salina D,
      3. Poon KK,
      4. et al
      . A novel mechanism of rapid nuclear neutrophil extracellular trap formation in response to Staphylococcus aureus. J Immunol 2010;185:7413–25.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    73. 72.↵
      1. Lande R,
      2. Gregorio J,
      3. Facchinetti V,
      4. et al
      . Plasmacytoid dendritic cells sense self-DNA coupled with antimicrobial peptide. Nature 2007;449:564–9.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    74. 73.↵
      1. Parker H,
      2. Albrett AM,
      3. Kettle AJ,
      4. et al
      . Myeloperoxidase associated with neutrophil extracellular traps is active and mediates bacterial killing in the presence of hydrogen peroxide. J Leukoc Biol 2012;91:369–76.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    75. 74.↵
      1. McDonald B,
      2. Urrutia R,
      3. Yipp BG,
      4. et al
      . Intravascular neutrophil extracellular traps capture bacteria from the bloodstream during sepsis. Cell Host Microbe 2012;12:324–33.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    76. 75.↵
      1. Urban CF,
      2. Reichard U,
      3. Brinkmann V,
      4. et al
      . Neutrophil extracellular traps capture and kill Candida albicans yeast and hyphal forms. Cell Microbiol 2006;8:668–76.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    77. 76.↵
      1. Jenne CN,
      2. Wong CH,
      3. Zemp FJ,
      4. et al
      . Neutrophils recruited to sites of infection protect from virus challenge by releasing neutrophil extracellular traps. Cell Host Microbe 2013;13:169–80.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    78. 77.↵
      1. Manolova I,
      2. Dancheva M,
      3. Halacheva K
      . Antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: prevalence, antigen specificity, and clinical associations. Rheumatol Int 2001;20:197–204.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    79. 78.↵
      1. Pradhan VD,
      2. Badakere SS,
      3. Bichile LS,
      4. et al
      . Anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies (ANCA) in systemic lupus erythematosus: prevalence, clinical associations and correlation with other autoantibodies. J Assoc Physicians India 2004;52:533–7.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    80. 79.↵
      1. Tamiya H,
      2. Tani K,
      3. Miyata J,
      4. et al
      . Defensins- and cathepsin G-ANCA in systemic lupus erythematosus. Rheumatol Int 2006;27:147–52.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    81. 80.↵
      1. Froy O,
      2. Sthoeger ZM
      . Defensins in systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2009;1173:365–9.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    82. 81.↵
      1. Lande R,
      2. Ganguly D,
      3. Facchinetti V,
      4. et al
      . Neutrophils activate plasmacytoid dendritic cells by releasing self-DNA-peptide complexes in systemic lupus erythematosus. Sci Transl Med 2011;3:73ra19.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    83. 82.↵
      1. Darrah E,
      2. Andrade F
      . NETs: the missing link between cell death and systemic autoimmune diseases? Front Immunol 2012;3:428.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    84. 83.↵
      1. Khandpur R,
      2. Carmona-Rivera C,
      3. Vivekanandan-Giri A,
      4. et al
      . NETs are a source of citrullinated autoantigens and stimulate inflammatory responses in rheumatoid arthritis. Sci Transl Med 2013;5:178ra40.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    85. 84.↵
      1. Holle JU,
      2. Wu QJ,
      3. Moosig F,
      4. et al
      . Membrane proteinase 3 (mPR3) expression on neutrophils is not increased in localized Wegener's granulomatosis (WG) and Churg-Strauss syndrome (CSS). Clin Exp Rheumatol 2010;28:46–50.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    86. 85.↵
      1. Hakkim A,
      2. Furnrohr BG,
      3. Amann K,
      4. et al
      . Impairment of neutrophil extracellular trap degradation is associated with lupus nephritis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010;107:9813–8.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    87. 86.↵
      1. Garcia-Romo GS,
      2. Caielli S,
      3. Vega B,
      4. et al
      . Netting neutrophils are major inducers of type I IFN production in pediatric systemic lupus erythematosus. Sci Transl Med 2011;3:73ra20.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    88. 87.↵
      1. Darrah E,
      2. Giles JT,
      3. Ols ML,
      4. et al
      . Erosive rheumatoid arthritis is associated with antibodies that activate PAD4 by increasing calcium sensitivity. Sci Transl Med 2013;5:186ra65.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    89. 88.↵
      1. Wood DD,
      2. Ackerley CA,
      3. Brand B,
      4. et al
      . Myelin localization of peptidylarginine deiminases 2 and 4: comparison of PAD2 and PAD4 activities. Lab Invest 2008;88:354–64.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    90. 89.↵
      1. Willis VC,
      2. Gizinski AM,
      3. Banda NK,
      4. et al
      . N-alpha-benzoyl-N5-(2-chloro-1-iminoethyl)-L-ornithine amide, a protein arginine deiminase inhibitor, reduces the severity of murine collagen-induced arthritis. J Immunol 2011;186:4396–404.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    91. 90.↵
      1. Knight JS,
      2. Zhao W,
      3. Luo W,
      4. et al
      . Peptidylarginine deiminase inhibition is immunomodulatory and vasculoprotective in murine lupus. J Clin Invest 2013;123:2981–93.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    92. 91.↵
      1. Wei L,
      2. Wasilewski E,
      3. Chakka SK,
      4. et al
      . Novel inhibitors of protein arginine deiminase with potential activity in multiple sclerosis animal model. J Med Chem 2013;56:1715–22.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    93. 92.↵
      1. Rohrbach AS,
      2. Slade DJ,
      3. Thompson PR,
      4. et al
      . Activation of PAD4 in NET formation. Front Immunol 2012;3:360.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    94. 93.↵
      1. Ramos-Kichik V,
      2. Mondragon-Flores R,
      3. Mondragon-Castelan M,
      4. et al
      . Neutrophil extracellular traps are induced by Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Tuberculosis (Edinb) 2009;89:29–37.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    95. 94.↵
      1. Byrd AS,
      2. O'Brien XM,
      3. Johnson CM,
      4. et al
      . An extracellular matrix-based mechanism of rapid neutrophil extracellular trap formation in response to Candida albicans. J Immunol 2013;190:4136–48.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    96. 95.↵
      1. Bruns S,
      2. Kniemeyer O,
      3. Hasenberg M,
      4. et al
      . Production of extracellular traps against Aspergillus fumigatus in vitro and in infected lung tissue is dependent on invading neutrophils and influenced by hydrophobin RodA. PLoS Pathog 2010;6:e1000873.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    97. 96.↵
      1. McCormick A,
      2. Heesemann L,
      3. Wagener J,
      4. et al
      . NETs formed by human neutrophils inhibit growth of the pathogenic mold Aspergillus fumigatus. Microbes Infect 2010;12:928–36.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    98. 97.↵
      1. Berends ET,
      2. Horswill AR,
      3. Haste NM,
      4. et al
      . Nuclease expression by Staphylococcus aureus facilitates escape from neutrophil extracellular traps. J Innate Immun 2010;2:576–86.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    99. 98.↵
      1. Ma AC,
      2. Kubes P
      . Platelets, neutrophils, and neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) in sepsis. J Thromb Haemost 2008;6:415–20.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    100.  99.↵
      1. Margraf S,
      2. Logters T,
      3. Reipen J,
      4. et al
      . Neutrophil-derived circulating free DNA (cf-DNA/NETs): a potential prognostic marker for posttraumatic development of inflammatory second hit and sepsis. Shock 2008;30:352–8.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    101. 100.↵
      1. Fuchs TA,
      2. Brill A,
      3. Duerschmied D,
      4. et al
      . Extracellular DNA traps promote thrombosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010;107:15880–5.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    102. 101.↵
      1. Palatinus A,
      2. Adams M
      . Thrombosis in systemic lupus erythematosus. Semin Thromb Hemost 2009;35:621–9.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    103. 102.↵
      1. Rock KL,
      2. Latz E,
      3. Ontiveros F,
      4. et al
      . The sterile inflammatory response. Annu Rev Immunol 2010;28:321–42.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    104. 103.↵
      1. Chen CJ,
      2. Shi Y,
      3. Hearn A,
      4. et al
      . MyD88-dependent IL-1 receptor signaling is essential for gouty inflammation stimulated by monosodium urate crystals. J Clin Invest 2006;116:2262–71.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    105. 104.↵
      1. Schorn C,
      2. Janko C,
      3. Latzko M,
      4. et al
      . Monosodium urate crystals induce extracellular DNA traps in neutrophils, eosinophils, and basophils but not in mononuclear cells. Front Immunol 2012;3:277.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    106. 105.↵
      1. Popa-Nita O,
      2. Naccache PH
      . Crystal-induced neutrophil activation. Immunol Cell Biol 2010;88:32–40.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    107. 106.↵
      1. Dwivedi N,
      2. Upadhyay J,
      3. Neeli I,
      4. et al
      . Felty's syndrome autoantibodies bind to deiminated histones and neutrophil extracellular chromatin traps. Arthritis Rheum 2012;64:982–92.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    108. 107.↵
      1. Suzuki T,
      2. Burlingame RW,
      3. Casiano CA,
      4. et al
      . Antihistone antibodies in systemic lupus erythematosus: assay dependency and effects of ubiquitination and serum DNA. J Rheumatol 1994;21:1081–91.
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    109. 108.↵
      1. Cohen MG,
      2. Webb J
      . Antihistone antibodies in rheumatoid arthritis and Felty's syndrome. Arthritis Rheum 1989;32:1319–24.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    110. 109.↵
      1. Rosenstein ED,
      2. Kramer N
      . Felty's and pseudo-Felty's syndromes. Semin Arthritis Rheum 1991;21:129–42.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    111. 110.↵
      1. Balint GP,
      2. Balint PV
      . Felty's syndrome. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2004;18:631–45.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    112. 111.↵
      1. Campion G,
      2. Maddison PJ,
      3. Goulding N,
      4. et al
      . The Felty syndrome: a case-matched study of clinical manifestations and outcome, serologic features, and immunogenetic associations. Medicine (Baltimore) 1990;69:69–80.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    113. 112.↵
      1. Breedveld FC,
      2. Lafeber GJ,
      3. de Vries E,
      4. et al
      . Immune complexes and the pathogenesis of neutropenia in Felty's syndrome. Ann Rheum Dis 1986;45:696–702.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    114. 113.↵
      1. Starkebaum G,
      2. Arend WP,
      3. Nardella FA,
      4. et al
      . Characterization of immune complexes and immunoglobulin G antibodies reactive with neutrophils in the sera of patients with Felty's syndrome. J Lab Clin Med 1980;96:238–51.
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    115. 114.↵
      1. van Krieken JH,
      2. Breedveld FC,
      3. te Velde J
      . The spleen in Felty's syndrome: a histological, morphometrical, and immunohistochemical study. Eur J Haematol 1988;40:58–64.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    116. 115.↵
      1. Turesson C,
      2. Jacobsson LT,
      3. Sturfelt G,
      4. et al
      . Rheumatoid factor and antibodies to cyclic citrullinated peptides are associated with severe extra-articular manifestations in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2007;66:59–64.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    117. 116.↵
      1. Alexiou I,
      2. Germenis A,
      3. Koutroumpas A,
      4. et al
      . Anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide-2 (CCP2) autoantibodies and extra-articular manifestations in Greek patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Rheumatol 2008;27:511–13.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    118. 117.↵
      1. Pratesi F,
      2. Dioni I,
      3. Tommasi C,
      4. et al
      . Antibodies from patients with rheumatoid arthritis target citrullinated histone 4 contained in neutrophils extracellular traps. Ann Rheum Dis 2013.
    119. 118.↵
      1. Fradet-Turcotte A,
      2. Canny MD,
      3. Escribano-Diaz C,
      4. et al
      . 53BP1 is a reader of the DNA-damage-induced H2A Lys 15 ubiquitin mark. Nature 2013;499:50–4.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    120. 119.
      1. Kinloch A,
      2. Tatzer V,
      3. Wait R,
      4. et al
      . Identification of citrullinated alpha-enolase as a candidate autoantigen in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Res Ther 2005;7:R1421–9.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    121. 120.
      1. Masson-Bessiere C,
      2. Sebbag M,
      3. Girbal-Neuhauser E,
      4. et al
      . The major synovial targets of the rheumatoid arthritis-specific antifilaggrin autoantibodies are deiminated forms of the alpha- and beta-chains of fibrin. J Immunol 2001;166:4177–84.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    122. 121.
      1. Suzuki A,
      2. Yamada R,
      3. Ohtake-Yamanaka M,
      4. et al
      . Anti-citrullinated collagen type I antibody is a target of autoimmunity in rheumatoid arthritis. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2005;333:418–26.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    123. 122.
      1. Burkhardt H,
      2. Sehnert B,
      3. Bockermann R,
      4. et al
      . Humoral immune response to citrullinated collagen type II determinants in early rheumatoid arthritis. Eur J Immunol 2005;35:1643–52.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    124. 123.
      1. Chang X,
      2. Yamada R,
      3. Suzuki A,
      4. et al
      . Citrullination of fibronectin in rheumatoid arthritis synovial tissue. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2005;44:1374–82.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    125. 124.
      1. Moscarello MA,
      2. Mastronardi FG,
      3. Wood DD
      . The role of citrullinated proteins suggests a novel mechanism in the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis. Neurochem Res 2007;32:251–6.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    126. 125.
      1. Okazaki Y,
      2. Suzuki A,
      3. Sawada T,
      4. et al
      . Identification of citrullinated eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4G1 as novel autoantigen in rheumatoid arthritis. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2006;341:94–100.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    127. 126.
      1. Matsuo K,
      2. Xiang Y,
      3. Nakamura H,
      4. et al
      . Identification of novel citrullinated autoantigens of synovium in rheumatoid arthritis using a proteomic approach. Arthritis Res Ther 2006;8:R175.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    128. 127.
      1. Goeb V,
      2. Thomas-L'Otellier M,
      3. Daveau R,
      4. et al
      . Candidate autoantigens identified by mass spectrometry in early rheumatoid arthritis are chaperones and citrullinated glycolytic enzymes. Arthritis Res Ther 2009;11:R38.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed

    Footnotes

    • Handling editor Tore K Kvien

    • Contributors Both authors contributed to writing and approving the submitted manuscript.

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.