Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Next in The JI
    • Archive
    • Brief Reviews
    • Pillars of Immunology
    • Translating Immunology
    • Most Read
    • Top Downloads
    • Annual Meeting Abstracts
  • COVID-19/SARS/MERS Articles
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • For Authors
    • Journal Policies
    • Influence Statement
    • For Advertisers
  • Editors
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Journal Policies
  • Subscribe
    • Journal Subscriptions
    • Email Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
    • ImmunoCasts
  • More
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • ImmunoCasts
    • AAI Disclaimer
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Other Publications
    • American Association of Immunologists
    • ImmunoHorizons

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
The Journal of Immunology
  • Other Publications
    • American Association of Immunologists
    • ImmunoHorizons
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
The Journal of Immunology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Next in The JI
    • Archive
    • Brief Reviews
    • Pillars of Immunology
    • Translating Immunology
    • Most Read
    • Top Downloads
    • Annual Meeting Abstracts
  • COVID-19/SARS/MERS Articles
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • For Authors
    • Journal Policies
    • Influence Statement
    • For Advertisers
  • Editors
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Journal Policies
  • Subscribe
    • Journal Subscriptions
    • Email Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
    • ImmunoCasts
  • More
    • Most Read
    • Most Cited
    • ImmunoCasts
    • AAI Disclaimer
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Follow The Journal of Immunology on Twitter
  • Follow The Journal of Immunology on RSS

Critical Functions of IRF4 in B and T Lymphocytes

James Hagman
J Immunol December 1, 2017, 199 (11) 3715-3716; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1701385
James Hagman
Department of Biomedical Research, National Jewish Health, Denver, CO 80206
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

The generation of functional B and T lymphocytes is orchestrated by multiple transcription factors that work together during development and activation. Our understanding of these factors advanced greatly during the 1990s, when genes encoding essential regulators of lymphocyte-specific transcription were identified. Requirements for many of these factors were confirmed in vivo by studying consequences of their loss in gene-targeted mice. Although much of the focus was on the identification and vetting of transcription factors that drive early lymphopoiesis, lineage-specific transcription, and differentiation, other factors were identified as nuclear mediators of signaling pathways. A major group of these regulators comprises the IFN regulatory factors (i.e., IRF1 and IRF2), which are induced by type I (IFN-α/β) and/or type II (IFN-γ) IFN. IRF4 was identified as a key factor with essential functions in lymphocytes, where it directs the development, affinity maturation, and terminal differentiation of B cells and has critical roles in diverse effector T cells. In this study, a seminal publication from the laboratory of Tak Mak, which was the first to describe the phenotype of mice lacking IRF4, is republished as a Pillars of Immunology article (1).

Prior to the generation of IRF4-deficient mice, IRF4 was given different names that reflected the context of its expression and functional activities. IRF4 was first identified as NF-EM5 motif (NF-EM5), a DNA-binding protein in B cells that was detected in ternary complexes including the Igκ L chain gene 3′ enhancer (2). NF-EM5 did not bind the Igκ 3′ enhancer by itself, but required direct interactions with the E26 transforming sequence (ETS) transcription factor purine box transcription factor 1 (PU.1) (Spi1) following PU.1’s specific phosphorylation by casein kinase II (3). Complexes with similar composition were also detected on two enhancers (Eλ3–1 and Eλ2–4) within Igλ L chain loci (4). Using a probe comprising PU.1/NF-EM5 composite sites of Eλ2–4, Eisenbeis et al. (5) used a protein-expression phage library to clone cDNAs encoding PU.1-interacting protein (Pip), which shares considerable homology with other IRFs. Use of this method to clone Pip cDNAs was possible because the cDNAs were incomplete: they lacked sequences that prevent binding of full-length Pip to the Eλ2–4 composite element in the absence of PU.1. Pip also inhibits transcriptional activation by other IRF proteins (e.g., IRF1) through competition for binding to IFN-stimulated response elements, suggesting that Pip functions as a dichotomous (PU.1 dependent or PU.1 independent) regulator of transcription (6). Coincidently with the discovery of Pip, the Tak Mak laboratory cloned cDNAs encoding lymphoid-specific IRF (LSIRF) from IL-4–stimulated murine spleen cells (7), and Hirai and colleagues (8) cloned cDNAs encoding a human homolog of Pip/LSIRF (originally referred to as IFN consensus sequence-binding protein in adult T cell leukemia lines or activated T cells or ICSAT).

In 1997, Tak Mak’s laboratory published the first analysis of mice lacking IRF4 (simplifying its nomenclature from Pip/LSIRF/ICSAT) (1). Homologous recombination was used to replace exons 2 and 3 of Irf4 with a neomycin resistance gene in embryonic stem cells, which were then used to generate viable IRF4−/− knockout mice. Analysis of B and T lymphocytes in peripheral lymphoid organs failed to detect significant differences between wild-type and knockout mice at 4–5 wk of age. However, at 10–15 wk, knockout mice exhibited profound splenomegaly and lymphadenopathy due to loss of homeostasis, with expansion of both B and T (CD4+ and CD8+) lymphocytes. Thymic cellularity and surface markers were unaffected in IRF4−/− mice.

The development of early B cell progenitors and immature B cells in bone marrow, together with peritoneal CD5+ B1 cells, were normal in IRF4−/− mice, as was surface expression of κ and λ L chains. However, spleens and lymph nodes exhibited increased mIgMhighmIgDlow and reduced mIgMlowmIgDhigh cell numbers, suggesting that B cell maturation in the periphery is defective in the absence of IRF4. The lack of B cell maturation in IRF4−/− mice was evidenced further by the absence of B220+CD23+ cells, germinal centers in B cell follicles of spleens and lymph nodes, and plasma cells. In light of these deficiencies, it is not surprising that resting serum levels of all Ig subclasses were decreased by >99%, in addition to the complete lack of responses to thymus-dependent and thymus-independent Ags.

Studies of B and T cells in IRF4-deficient mice confirmed IRF4’s importance as a mediator of BCR and TCR signaling. Proliferation of splenic B cells in response to LPS stimulation or BCR crosslinking with anti-IgM with or without IL-4 was impaired in the absence of IRF4, but responses to anti-CD40 were normal. Incubation of T cells with anti-CD3, Con A, or staphylococcal enterotoxin A resulted in decreased proliferation that was not restored by IL-2. Production of cytokines (IL-2, IL-4, IFN) in response to anti-CD3 was also greatly reduced. IRF4−/− T cells failed to proliferate in MLRs, confirming that the defect is T cell intrinsic. IRF4-deficient T cells also exhibited reduced functions in vivo, as indicated by their failure to generate cytotoxic T cell responses to lymphocytic choriomeningitis infection. Additionally, graft versus host responses were minimal following transplant of IRF4−/− T cells into allogeneic SCID mice, IRF4−/− mice failed to reject completely allogeneic tumor cells.

Since the publication of this Pillars of Immunology article, hundreds of publications have broadened and refined the details of IRF4-dependent mechanisms in B and T cells (also in dendritic and thymic epithelial cells). IRF4 has been validated as a master regulator of fate choices in B cells, driving affinity maturation and terminal differentiation of plasma cells (reviewed in Ref. 9). Likewise, the literature on IRF4 and T cell differentiation and effector functions suggests extensive roles both as a competitor and cooperative partner in regulatory networks driving the fates of conventional CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, but also of regulatory T cells and follicular helper T cells (10, 11). Moreover, cooperation between IRF4 and other transcription factors in addition to PU.1 (e.g., AP1, BATF) has proven to be a hallmark of this factor. In this regard, a recent study extended possible roles of IRF4-containing complexes (BATF-IRF4) to include a role as a rheostat sensor of TCR signal strength and director of signaling outcomes (12).

The pervasiveness of IRF4 in B and T cell regulatory pathways suggests its potential utility as a target of immunomodulatory and cancer-specific drugs. IRF4 is expressed in multiple cell types implicated in the pathogenesis of autoimmune diseases (reviewed in Ref. 13). Association with cancers derived from lymphoid cells, such as multiple myeloma, implicated IRF4 as an oncogenic driver and potential target for inhibition by anti-cancer agents (14). The potential for selectively blocking IRF4 gene expression was greatly advanced by the identification of a superenhancer in the human IRF4 locus, a promising therapeutic target of the bromodomain inhibitor JQ1 (15).

In summary, early studies in mice provided a springboard for major leaps in our understanding of IRF4’s place in lymphocyte regulatory networks and function. It is likely that the full extent of IRF4’s cooperation with other factors, as well as its impact on human immunity and disease, remains to be revealed.

Disclosures

The author has no financial conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

The author thanks Courtney Fleenor, Tessa Arends, and Brian P. O’Connor (National Jewish Health) for reading and commenting on the manuscript.

Footnotes

  • J.H. is supported by the Wendy Siegel Fund for Leukemia and Cancer Research and National Institutes of Health Grant R01 AI09847.

  • Abbreviations used in this article:

    IRF
    IFN regulatory factor
    LSIRF
    lymphoid-specific IRF
    NF-EM5
    NF-EM5 motif
    Pip
    purine box transcription factor–interacting protein
    PU.1
    purine box transcription factor 1.

  • Copyright © 2017 by The American Association of Immunologists, Inc.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Mittrücker, H.-W.,
    2. T. Matsuyama,
    3. A. Grossman,
    4. T. M. Kündig,
    5. J. Potter,
    6. A. Shahinian,
    7. A. Wakeham,
    8. B. Patterson,
    9. P. S. Ohashi,
    10. T. W. Mak
    . 1997. Requirement for the transcription factor LSIRF/IRF4 for mature B and T lymphocyte function. Science 275: 540–543.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Pongubala, J. M. R.,
    2. S. Nagulapalli,
    3. M. J. Klemsz,
    4. S. R. McKercher,
    5. R. A. Maki,
    6. M. L. Atchison
    . 1992. PU.1 recruits a second nuclear factor to a site important for immunoglobulin kappa 3′ enhancer activity. Mol. Cell. Biol. 12: 368–378.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Pongubala, J. M. R.,
    2. C. Van Beveren,
    3. S. Nagulapalli,
    4. M. J. Klemsz,
    5. S. R. McKercher,
    6. R. A. Maki,
    7. M. L. Atchison
    . 1993. Effect of PU.1 phosphorylation on interaction with NF-EM5 and transcriptional activation. Science 259: 1622–1625.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Eisenbeis, C. F.,
    2. H. Singh,
    3. U. Storb
    . 1993. PU.1 is a component of a multiprotein complex which binds an essential site in the murine Ig lambda 2-4 enhancer. Mol. Cell. Biol. 13: 6452–6461.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Eisenbeis, C. F.,
    2. H. Singh,
    3. U. Storb
    . 1995. Pip, a novel IRF family member, is a lymphoid-specific, PU.1-dependent transcriptional activator. Genes Dev. 9: 1377–1387.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Brass, A. L.,
    2. E. Kehrli,
    3. C. F. Eisenbeis,
    4. U. Storb,
    5. H. Singh
    . 1996. Pip, a lymphoid-restricted IRF, contains a regulatory domain that is important for autoinhibition and ternary complex formation with the Ets factor PU.1. Genes Dev. 10: 2335–2347.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. Matsuyama, T.,
    2. A. Grossman,
    3. H. W. Mittrücker,
    4. D. P. Siderovski,
    5. F. Kiefer,
    6. T. Kawakami,
    7. C. D. Richardson,
    8. T. Taniguchi,
    9. S. K. Yoshinaga,
    10. T. W. Mak
    . 1995. Molecular cloning of LSIRF, a lymphoid-specific member of the interferon regulatory factor family that binds the interferon-stimulated response element (ISRE). Nucleic Acids Res. 23: 2127–2136.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Yamagata, T.,
    2. J. Nishida,
    3. S. Tanaka,
    4. R. Sakai,
    5. K. Mitani,
    6. M. Yoshida,
    7. T. Taniguchi,
    8. Y. Yazaki,
    9. H. Hirai
    . 1996. A novel interferon regulatory factor family transcription factor, ICSAT/Pip/LSIRF, that negatively regulates the activity of interferon-regulated genes. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16: 1283–1294.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Shinnakasu, R.,
    2. T. Kurosaki
    . 2017. Regulation of memory B and plasma cell differentiation. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 45: 126–131.
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Zheng, Y.,
    2. A. Chaudhry,
    3. A. Kas,
    4. P. deRoos,
    5. J. M. Kim,
    6. T. T. Chu,
    7. L. Corcoran,
    8. P. Treuting,
    9. U. Klein,
    10. A. Y. Rudensky
    . 2009. Regulatory T-cell suppressor program co-opts transcription factor IRF4 to control T(H)2 responses. Nature 458: 351–356.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Bollig, N.,
    2. A. Brüstle,
    3. K. Kellner,
    4. W. Ackermann,
    5. E. Abass,
    6. H. Raifer,
    7. B. Camara,
    8. C. Brendel,
    9. G. Giel,
    10. E. Bothur, et al
    . 2012. Transcription factor IRF4 determines germinal center formation through follicular T-helper cell differentiation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109: 8664–8669.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    1. Iwata, A.,
    2. V. Durai,
    3. R. Tussiwand,
    4. C. G. Briseño,
    5. X. Wu,
    6. G. E. Grajales-Reyes,
    7. T. Egawa,
    8. T. L. Murphy,
    9. K. M. Murphy
    . 2017. Quality of TCR signaling determined by differential affinities of enhancers for the composite BATF-IRF4 transcription factor complex. Nat. Immunol. 18: 563–572.
    OpenUrl
  13. ↵
    1. Qiu, H.,
    2. H. Wu,
    3. V. Chan,
    4. C. S. Lau,
    5. Q. Lu
    . 2017. Transcriptional and epigenetic regulation of follicular T-helper cells and their role in autoimmunity. Autoimmunity 50: 71–81.
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    1. Shaffer, A. L.,
    2. N. C. Emre,
    3. L. Lamy,
    4. V. N. Ngo,
    5. G. Wright,
    6. W. Xiao,
    7. J. Powell,
    8. S. Dave,
    9. X. Yu,
    10. H. Zhao, et al
    . 2008. IRF4 addiction in multiple myeloma. Nature 454: 226–231.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Lovén, J.,
    2. H. A. Hoke,
    3. C. Y. Lin,
    4. A. Lau,
    5. D. A. Orlando,
    6. C. R. Vakoc,
    7. J. E. Bradner,
    8. T. I. Lee,
    9. R. A. Young
    . 2013. Selective inhibition of tumor oncogenes by disruption of super-enhancers. Cell 153: 320–334.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Immunology: 199 (11)
The Journal of Immunology
Vol. 199, Issue 11
1 Dec 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Advertising (PDF)
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about The Journal of Immunology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Critical Functions of IRF4 in B and T Lymphocytes
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from The Journal of Immunology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the The Journal of Immunology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Critical Functions of IRF4 in B and T Lymphocytes
James Hagman
The Journal of Immunology December 1, 2017, 199 (11) 3715-3716; DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1701385

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Critical Functions of IRF4 in B and T Lymphocytes
James Hagman
The Journal of Immunology December 1, 2017, 199 (11) 3715-3716; DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1701385
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Disclosures
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Conceiving the Inconceivable: The Function of Aire in Immune Tolerance to Peripheral Tissue-Restricted Antigens in the Thymus
  • Glial Cells as Regulators of Neuroimmune Interactions in the Central Nervous System
  • The Colon as a Major Site of Immunoregulation by CD4+ T Cell Subsets in the Steady State
Show more PILLARS OF IMMUNOLOGY

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Next in The JI
  • Archive
  • Brief Reviews
  • Pillars of Immunology
  • Translating Immunology

For Authors

  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Instructions for Authors
  • About the Journal
  • Journal Policies
  • Editors

General Information

  • Advertisers
  • Subscribers
  • Rights and Permissions
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Public Access
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer

Journal Services

  • Email Alerts
  • RSS Feeds
  • ImmunoCasts
  • Twitter

Copyright © 2021 by The American Association of Immunologists, Inc.

Print ISSN 0022-1767        Online ISSN 1550-6606