Regulation of Foxo1 expression is critical for central B cell tolerance and allelic exclusion.

Resolving the molecular mechanisms of central B cell tolerance might unveil strategies that prevent autoimmunity. Here, using a mouse model of central B cell tolerance in which Forkhead box protein O1 (Foxo1) is either deleted or over-expressed in B cells, we show that deleting Foxo1 blocks receptor editing, curtails clonal deletion, and decreases CXCR4 expression, allowing high-avidity autoreactive B cells to emigrate to the periphery whereby they mature but remain anergic and short lived. Conversely, expression of degradation-resistant Foxo1 promotes receptor editing in the absence of self-antigen but leads to allelic inclusion.

CD19 Is Internalized Together with IgM in Proportion to B Cell Receptor Stimulation and Is Modulated by Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase in Bone Marrow Immature B Cells.

Newly generated immature B cells that bind self-antigen with high avidity arrest in differentiation and undergo central tolerance via receptor editing and clonal deletion. These autoreactive immature B cells also express low surface levels of the coreceptor CD19, a key activator of the PI3K pathway. Signals emanating from both CD19 and PI3K are known to be critical for attenuating receptor editing and selecting immature B cells into the periphery.

Preclinical and Phase 1 Assessment of Antisense Oligonucleotide Bepirovirsen in Hepatitis B Virus-Transgenic Mice and Healthy Human Volunteers: Support for Clinical Dose Selection and Evaluation of Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Single and Multiple Doses.

Dose-dependent reductions in hepatitis B virus (HBV) RNA, DNA, and viral proteins following bepirovirsen administration were observed in HepG2.2.15 cells.

Commentary: The real (?) effect of smartphone use on parenting - a commentary on Modecki et al. (2020).

A recent publication by Modecki and colleagues asserts that 'more [smart]phone use was associated with higher parenting quality'. Modecki and colleagues make their generalistic concluding statement in contradiction to an increasingly conflicting research corpus, and we suggest that a more cautious interpretation of their data would be beneficial. This study used a cross-sectional convenience sample; however elsewhere, research questions the ability of participants to accurately estimate their own smartphone use.