抗原变异可使得多种致病微生物易于逃避宿主免疫应答。表达在感染红细胞表面的恶性疟原虫红细胞表面蛋白1（PfPMP1）与感染红细胞、内皮细胞、树突状细胞以及胎盘的单个或多个受体作用，在黏附及免疫逃避中起关键的作用。每个单倍体基因组var基因家族编码约60种成员，通过启动转录不同的var基因变异体为抗原变异提供了分子基础。

疟原虫var基因转换速率变化导致抗原变异[英]／Paul H, Robert P, Christodoulou Z, et al//Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A

The secretion of glucocorticoids (GCs) is a classic endocrine response to stress. Despite that, it remains controversial as to what purpose GCs serve at such times. One view, stretching back to the time of Hans Selye, posits that GCs help mediate the ongoing or pending stress response, either via basal levels of GCs permitting other facets of the stress response to emerge efficaciously, and/or by stress levels of GCs actively stimulating the stress response. In contrast, a revisionist viewpoint posits that GCs suppress the stress response, preventing it from being pathologically overactivated. In this review, we consider recent findings regarding GC action and, based on them, generate criteria for determining whether a particular GC action permits, stimulates, or suppresses an ongoing stressresponse or, as an additional category, is preparative for a subsequent stressor. We apply these GC actions to the realms of cardiovascular function, fluid volume and hemorrhage, immunity and inflammation, metabolism, neurobiology, and reproductive physiology. We find that GC actions fall into markedly different categories, depending on the physiological endpoint in question, with evidence for mediating effects in some cases, and suppressive or preparative in others. We then attempt to assimilate these heterogeneous GC actions into a physiological whole. (Endocrine Reviews 21: 55‐ 89, 2000)

/pdf/how-do-glucocorticoids-influence-stress-responses-4egr3fa2k0.pdf

How do glucocorticoids influence stress responses? Integrating permissive, suppressive, stimulatory, and preparative actions.

Over 60 years ago, Selye1 recognized the paradox that the physiologic systems activated by stress can not only protect and restore but also damage the body. What links these seemingly contradictory roles? How does stress influence the pathogenesis of disease, and what accounts for the variation in vulnerability to stress-related diseases among people with similar life experiences? How can stress-induced damage be quantified? These and many other questions still challenge investigators. This article reviews the long-term effect of the physiologic response to stress, which I refer to as allostatic load.2 Allostasis — the ability to achieve stability through change3 — . . .

/pdf/protective-and-damaging-effects-of-stress-mediators-34e0m747fy.pdf

Protective and Damaging Effects of Stress Mediators

Here we report that increased pup licking and grooming (LG) and arched-back nursing (ABN) by rat mothers altered the offspring epigenome at a glucocorticoid receptor (GR) gene promoter in the hippocampus. Offspring of mothers that showed high levels of LG and ABN were found to have differences in DNA methylation, as compared to offspring of 'low-LG-ABN' mothers. These differences emerged over the first week of life, were reversed with cross-fostering, persisted into adulthood and were associated with altered histone acetylation and transcription factor (NGFI-A) binding to the GR promoter. Central infusion of a histone deacetylase inhibitor removed the group differences in histone acetylation, DNA methylation, NGFI-A binding, GR expression and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) responses to stress, suggesting a causal relation among epigenomic state, GR expression and the maternal effect on stress responses in the offspring. Thus we show that an epigenomic state of a gene can be established through behavioral programming, and it is potentially reversible.

/pdf/epigenetic-programming-by-maternal-behavior-nhsklwyk7o.pdf

Epigenetic programming by maternal behavior.

In response to stress, the brain activates several neuropeptide-secreting systems. This eventually leads to the release of adrenal corticosteroid hormones, which subsequently feed back on the brain and bind to two types of nuclear receptor that act as transcriptional regulators. By targeting many genes, corticosteroids function in a binary fashion, and serve as a master switch in the control of neuronal and network responses that underlie behavioural adaptation. In genetically predisposed individuals, an imbalance in this binary control mechanism can introduce a bias towards stress-related brain disease after adverse experiences. New candidate susceptibility genes that serve as markers for the prediction of vulnerable phenotypes are now being identified.

Stress and the brain: from adaptation to disease

In this review, we have described the function of MR and GR in hippocampal neurons. The balance in actions mediated by the two corticosteroid receptor types in these neurons appears critical for neuronal excitability, stress responsiveness, and behavioral adaptation. Dysregulation of this MR/GR balance brings neurons in a vulnerable state with consequences for regulation of the stress response and enhanced vulnerability to disease in genetically predisposed individuals. The following specific inferences can be made on the basis of the currently available facts. 1. Corticosterone binds with high affinity to MRs predominantly localized in limbic brain (hippocampus) and with a 10-fold lower affinity to GRs that are widely distributed in brain. MRs are close to saturated with low basal concentrations of corticosterone, while high corticosterone concentrations during stress occupy both MRs and GRs. 2. The neuronal effects of corticosterone, mediated by MRs and GRs, are long-lasting, site-specific, and conditional. The action depends on cellular context, which is in part determined by other signals that can activate their own transcription factors interacting with MR and GR. These interactions provide an impressive diversity and complexity to corticosteroid modulation of gene expression. 3. Conditions of predominant MR activation, i.e., at the circadian trough at rest, are associated with the maintenance of excitability so that steady excitatory inputs to the hippocampal CA1 area result in considerable excitatory hippocampal output. By contrast, additional GR activation, e.g., after acute stress, generally depresses the CA1 hippocampal output. A similar effect is seen after adrenalectomy, indicating a U-shaped dose-response dependency of these cellular responses after the exposure to corticosterone. 4. Corticosterone through GR blocks the stress-induced HPA activation in hypothalamic CRH neurons and modulates the activity of the excitatory and inhibitory neural inputs to these neurons. Limbic (e.g., hippocampal) MRs mediate the effect of corticosterone on the maintenance of basal HPA activity and are of relevance for the sensitivity or threshold of the central stress response system. How this control occurs is not known, but it probably involves a steady excitatory hippocampal output, which regulates a GABA-ergic inhibitory tone on PVN neurons. Colocalized hippocampal GRs mediate a counteracting (i.e., disinhibitory) influence. Through GRs in ascending aminergic pathways, corticosterone potentiates the effect of stressors and arousal on HPA activation. The functional interaction between these corticosteroid-responsive inputs at the level of the PVN is probably the key to understanding HPA dysregulation associated with stress-related brain disorders. 5. Fine-tuning of HPA regulation occurs through MR- and GR-mediated effects on the processing of information in higher brain structures. Under healthy conditions, hippocampal MRs are involved in processes underlying integration of sensory information, interpretation of environmental information, and execution of appropriate behavioral reactions. Activation of hippocampal GRs facilitates storage of information and promotes elimination of inadequate behavioral responses. These behavioral effects mediated by MR and GR are linked, but how they influence endocrine regulation is not well understood. 6. Dexamethasone preferentially targets the pituitary in the blockade of stress-induced HPA activation. The brain penetration of this synthetic glucocorticoid is hampered by the mdr1a P-glycoprotein in the blood-brain barrier. Administration of moderate amounts of dexamethasone partially depletes the brain of corticosterone, and this has destabilizing consequences for excitability and information processing. 7. The set points of HPA regulation and MR/GR balance are genetically programmed, but can be reset by early life experiences involving mother-infant interaction. 8. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

/pdf/brain-corticosteroid-receptor-balance-in-health-and-disease-1s4dl9ggav.pdf

Brain corticosteroid receptor balance in health and disease.

Adrenal steroid receptors and actions in the nervous system

LOCALISATION OF 11β-HYDROXYSTEROID DEHYDROGENASE—TISSUE SPECIFIC PROTECTOR OF THE MINERALOCORTICOID RECEPTOR

https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/2896622/279_3621y.pdf

Mineralocorticoid and glucocorticoid receptors in the brain. Implications for ion permeability and transmitter systems

The present study examined the association between hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) and hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axes. HPA activity determined by plasma levels of adrenocorticotropin (ACTH) and corticosterone (B) was assessed in intact female rats as a function of oestrous cycle stage under resting conditions and after exposure to a 20 min restraint stress. To delineate the roles of oestradiol and progesterone in HPA axis modulation, plasma concentrations of ACTH and B were determined in ovariectomised (OVX) animals treated with oestradiol and/or progesterone under resting conditions and during exposure to the stress of a novel environment. The effects of these steroid treatments on the transcription and/or binding properties of the two corticosteroid receptors, the mineralocorticoid (MR) and glucocorticoid (GR) receptors, were also examined in hippocampal tissue, (i) Fluctuations in basal and stress-induced plasma ACTH and B concentrations were found during the oestrous cycle with highest levels at late pro-oestrus. (ii) In OVX steroid-replaced animals, basal and stress-induced activity was enhanced in oestradiol and oestradiol plus progesterone-treated animals compared with OVX controls. (iii) Cytosol binding assays revealed an oestradiol-induced decrease in hippocampal MR capacity. This decrease appears to be due to an effect of the steroid on MR transcription as in situ hybridisation analysis of MR mRNA showed an oestradiol-induced decrease in MR transcript in all hippocampal subfields. (iv) Treatment of oestradiol-primed animals with progesterone reversed the oestradiol-induced decrease in hippocampal MR capacity. Data from MR mRNA hybridisation in situ experiments indicate that this reversal may be due to an antagonism of the oestradiol effect on MR transcription. (v) Progesterone treatment with or without prior oestradiol-priming induced a significant decrease in the apparent binding affinity of hippocampal MR. We show that progesterone and its 11 beta-hydroxylated derivative have a high affinity for the hippocampal MR. (vi) Neither oestradiol nor progesterone affected GR binding parameters in the hippocampus. In conclusion, we find that sex steroids modulate HPA activity and suggest that the observed effects of these steroids on hippocampal MR may underlie their concerted mechanism of action in inducing an enhanced activity at the period of late pro-oestrus.

E.R. de Kloet

Papers

Brain corticosteroid receptor balance in health and disease.

Adrenal steroid receptors and actions in the nervous system

LOCALISATION OF 11β-HYDROXYSTEROID DEHYDROGENASE—TISSUE SPECIFIC PROTECTOR OF THE MINERALOCORTICOID RECEPTOR

Mineralocorticoid and glucocorticoid receptors in the brain. Implications for ion permeability and transmitter systems

The influence of ovarian steroids on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal regulation in the female rat.