Siglecs Modulate Activities of Immune Cells Through Positive and Negative Regulation of ROS Generation

Abstract

Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are a group of oxygen-containing highly-reactive molecules produced from oxidative metabolic processes or in response to intracellular signals like cytokines and external stimuli like pathogen attack. They regulate a range of physiological processes and are involved in innate immune responses against infectious agents. Deregulation of ROS contributes to a plethora of disease conditions. Sialic acids are carbohydrates, present on cell surfaces or soluble proteins. Sialic acid-binding immunoglobulin-like lectins (Siglecs) recognize and bind to sialic acids. These are widely expressed on various types of immune cells. Siglecs modulate immune activation and can promote or inhibit ROS generation under different contexts. Siglecs promote ROS-dependent cell death in neutrophils and eosinophils while limiting oxidative stress associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), sickle cell disease (SCD), coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), etc. This review distinguishes itself in summarizing the current understanding of the role of Siglecs in moderating ROS production and their distinct effect on different immune cells; that ultimately determine the cellular response and the disease outcome. This is an important field of investigation having scope for both expansion and medical importance.

Introduction

Sialic acids (SA), a family of nine-carbon acidic monosaccharides, are commonly found at terminal positions in glycan chains attached to glycoproteins/glycolipids (sialoglycans) present on cell surfaces or soluble proteins. So far, nearly 50 different derivatives of SA have been discovered (1). Sialic acids are commonly found in higher mammals but also in several protozoans, bacteria, and fungi (1). Sialic acid-binding immunoglobulin-like lectins (Siglecs) are a class of glycan-binding proteins that recognize and bind to these SA (2–4). Several Siglecs modulate cellular activity and response via signaling through cytoplasmic regulatory motifs.

Reactive oxygen species (ROS) refers to oxygen-derived, highly reactive molecules which include superoxide anion and hydrogen peroxide (5). ROS are produced in mitochondria as by-products of the electron transfer chain during aerobic respiration. Phagocytic cells (macrophages, neutrophils, and dendritic cells) also generate ROS and reactive nitrogen species (RNS) as components of “oxidative burst” for degrading biomolecules and internalized pathogens (6).

In this review, we have attempted to highlight how Siglec-sialoglycan interactions modulate ROS generation in various immune cells depending on physiological states or infections.

Distribution and Classification of Siglecs

Most immune cells of hematopoietic origin express one or more kinds of Siglecs (7). Although resting T cells show low Siglec expression, a few T cell subsets express Siglecs (particularly Siglec-5, 7, 9, and 10) after activation or in specific contexts (8–10) (Table 1). Some Siglecs, like Siglec-9, are expressed on several immune cells. However, expression of certain Siglecs is restricted to particular cell types; like Siglec-1 (Sialoadhesin) on monocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells (15). Siglec-2 (CD22) is predominantly observed on B cells though it is also expressed at low levels on mast cells, dendritic cells, and basophils (17–20) (Table 1).

Siglecs are classified into two major groups based on sequence homology. The first group (Siglec-1, CD22, Siglec-4, and Siglec-15) has low sequence similarity between each other but is conserved across species. In contrast, CD33-related Siglecs (CD33r Siglecs) are closely related but not highly conserved (21). Siglecs have been extensively studied in humans, mice, and few other animals. Humans express around 11 different CD33r Siglecs (Siglec-3,-5,-6,-7,-8,-9,-10,−11,−14,−16,−17) while mice express only a few (Siglec-3,-E,-F,-G,-H) (11). Therefore, murine equivalents of only a few human Siglecs are known (Table 1).

Siglec Affinities and Ligand Preferences

Sialic acids are attached to glycans via α-glycosidic linkages formed between its C2 with C3 (α2,3) or C6 (α2,6) positions of galactose or C6 position of N-acetylgalactosamine. Polymers of SA are termed polysialic acid, where successive SA residues are primarily linked via α2,8 linkages, or by α2,9 linkages in a few cases (1). Different Siglecs have characteristic affinities towards specific sialoglycans based on the SA position, linkages, and surrounding sugars (Table 1). Siglec-9 recognizes SA linked to galactose via α2,3/α2,6 linkages and other sialylated structures like sialyl Lewis-x (SLex), 6-sulfo-SLex (22, 23). However, Siglec-8 prefers α2,3 linked SA attached to sulfated galactose, as seen in 6-sulfo-SLex (22). Ligand preferences of several Siglecs have been elucidated through glycan-binding arrays, molecular modeling studies, cell-based binding assays, etc. (22). Siglecs can bind sialoglycans present on the same cell (cis-interactions) or extracellular ligands present on neighboring cells or secretory glycoproteins (trans-interactions).

Siglec Clustering Enhances Their Signaling Activity

Siglec-sialoglycan binding is weak and transient (24). Interaction between Siglecs with multivalent ligands leads to Siglec clustering, which increases the strength of Siglec-ligand binding and initiates cellular signaling (22, 25–27). Multivalent ligands present several Siglec-binding sites. These may be extracellular ligands, antibodies, synthetic agonists interacting with Siglecs in trans, or cell surface sialoglycans, membrane-bound synthetic ligands binding in cis (26, 27). Siglec-clustering into nanodomains was revealed by high-resolution microscopy (28, 29). Siglec clustering into signaling domains by anti-Siglec antibodies is shown (Figure 1A).

Figure 1

Function

Siglecs are transmembrane proteins that generally interact with sialoglycans through the carbohydrate recognition domain present in their extracellular N-terminal immunoglobulin-like folds (V-set domain). Several Siglecs contain immunoreceptor tyrosine-based inhibitory motifs (ITIMs) in their cytoplasmic domains while some are associated with adaptor proteins that contain immunoreceptor tyrosine-based activatory motifs (ITAMs) (7, 30). Signaling via ITIM leads to recruitment of Src homology region domain-containing phosphatase-1 and 2 (SHP-1, SHP-2) which inhibits phosphorylation-based cellular signaling pathways (14, 31). Siglec-sialoglycan binding leads to modulation of cellular activity due to signaling via either ITIMs (inhibitory) or ITAMs (activatory) motifs (21).

Siglecs play several roles in normal physiology, including immunomodulation, phagocytosis of sialylated pathogens (mainly Siglec-1); regulation of B cell signaling and survival (CD22); maintenance of axon-myelin interactions, axon growth (Siglec-4); regulation of osteoclast differentiation (Siglec-15), etc (12–14, 16). Distribution, ligand preference, and functions of a few human Siglecs have been compiled in Table 1.

Effect of ROS

ROS has a direct detrimental effect on lipids, proteins, and DNA. However, low levels of ROS are required for maintaining metabolism, signal transduction, cell proliferation, apoptosis, and aging process (32). Oxidative stress due to excessive ROS generation is implicated in asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, auto-immunity, and neurodegenerative diseases (5). Phagocytic cells express a multi-subunit NADPH-dependent phagocytic oxidase (Phox or NOX2), which produces ROS as a component of antimicrobial defense (33). Some components of NOX2 (p67^phox, p47^phox, p40^phox, a small G protein-rac1, rac2), are localized in the cytosol and some are membrane-associated (gp91^phox, p22^phox). The activity of membrane-associated gp91^phox (34) is indispensable for NOX2 function, which uses NADPH as an electron donor to generate superoxide anion (O₂^*-) by oxygen reduction (35–37).

Siglec-Based Modulation of ROS Production

Siglecs modulate ROS production through Siglec-sialoglycan binding, signaling through ITIMs or direct protein-protein interactions. Siglec-9 was identified as a potential ligand for human amine oxidase type 3 (hAOC3) by phage peptide library-based screening (38). Flow cytometry confirmed the binding between recombinant Chinese Hamster Ovary cells (CHO) expressing hAOC3 and CHO-expressing Siglec-9 (39). Surface plasmon resonance (SPR) based binding assays demonstrated that Siglec-9 C2₂ domain binds to the active site of hAOC3. Introduction of point mutations followed by SPR-based binding assays identified Arg284 and Arg290 in Siglec-9 to be critical for its binding with hAOC3. Such Siglec-binding with oxidase enzyme through protein-protein interactions enhances hAOC3 activity and generates hydrogen peroxide (39). Siglec-9 also binds to sialoglycoprotein hAOC3 through sialic acid-Siglec binding via its V domain (40).

Siglec-E knockout neutrophils infected with non-sialylated Escherichia coli strains (Gram-negative bacteria) produced significantly less amount of ROS than wild-type neutrophils, suggesting that Siglec-E promoted ROS generation (41). Silencing Siglec-E or Siglec-9 (the human equivalent of Siglec-E) also reduced ROS generation in neutrophils/THP-1 cells after E.coli infection (41). Immunoprecipitation revealed that endogenous Siglec-E associates with NOX2 subunits (gp91^phox/p47^phox) in E.coli-infected murine neutrophil and Tyr432 residue was found to be critical for Siglec-E-p47^phox binding. Cells overexpressing Siglec-E with mutated Tyr432 also produced lower amounts of ROS following E.coli infection. This confirmed that Tyr432 in the ITIM domain of Siglec-E is needed for its association with NOX2 subunit p47^phox which promotes ROS production (41).

Interestingly, treatment of primary human neutrophils with a synthetic Siglec-9 agonist (pS9L) or anti-Siglec-9 antibody also leads to ROS generation which is inhibited upon SHP-1/2 inhibitor treatment. This indicates that Siglec-9 engagement also promotes ROS generation through SHP-1/SHP-2 signaling (42).

Siglec Engagement on Immune Cells Modulates ROS Generation

Eosinophils

Treating resting eosinophils with anti-Siglec-8 monoclonal antibodies and secondary polyclonal antibodies leads to extensive crosslinking or clustering of Siglec-8 (Figure 1B, left panel). Siglec-8 clustering was followed by ROS generation, reduction in mitochondrial membrane potential, and cleavage of caspases; culminating in cellular apoptosis (43, 44). Eosinophils incubated with pro-survival cytokine IL-5 show further increased cell death upon Siglec-8 cross-linking (45). These IL-5-activated eosinophils exhibit caspase-independent necrotic death, involving ROS generation and increased phosphorylation of MEK1, ERK1/2 (46). Treatment with ROS inhibitors confirmed that Siglec-crosslinking-mediated ROS production is essential for triggering eosinophil death in both resting and activated cells. Produced ROS was accumulated intracellularly in eosinophils (47).

In contrast, eosinophils stimulated with pro-survival cytokine IL-33 also exhibit enhanced cell death after Siglec-8 cross-linking, but without any significant increase in ROS generation (48). The lack of ROS production in IL-33-stimulated eosinophils remains to be explored.

Siglec-F shows a similar ligand binding profile like Siglec-8 and is also expressed on eosinophils. It is considered as a functionally convergent paralog of Siglec-8 in mice (49, 50). Mice treated with anti-Siglec-F antibodies show induction of caspase-dependent eosinophil death independent of NADPH oxidase activity and ROS production (51).

Binding Siglec-8 with monoclonal antibodies or synthetic Siglec-8 ligands leads to increased expression of CD11b/CD18. CD11b/CD18 heterodimer belongs to the β2-integrin subgroup, which increases the adhesiveness of IL-5-stimulated eosinophils. Such Siglec-8 engagement also leads to a time-dependent increase in ROS production, dependent on β2-integrin expression (52). NADPH oxidase (NOX) enzyme was identified as the source of ROS (52). This indicates antibodies or ligand-based Siglec-8 binding triggers ROS production through probable modulation of NOX activity.

Neutrophils

Neutrophils are the most abundant type of immune cells present in blood. Neutrophils perform immunosurveillance and respond to infiltrating microbes by phagocytosis, respiratory burst, degranulation, and formation of neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) (53). Following successful clearance of microbes, responding neutrophils generally undergo apoptosis. However, pro-survival cytokines or growth factors in the milieu often prevent such apoptosis, leading to chronic or acute inflammations.

Antibody-based cross-linking of Siglec-9 triggers apoptosis in normal resting neutrophils due to ROS generation and caspase cleavage (Figure 1B, right panel) (54). Interestingly, neutrophils isolated from patients suffering from inflammatory conditions like rheumatic arthritis, acute septic shock, etc. show enhanced expression of Siglec-9 and increased death upon Siglec-9 cross-linking. Neutrophils stimulated with GM-CSF, interferon-α or interferon-γ (IFN-α/γ) similarly exhibit increased cell death after Siglec-9 cross-linking (47).

Such cytokine-stimulated neutrophils mainly showed non-apoptotic cell death upon Siglec-binding, characterized by cytoplasmic vacuolization, non-involvement of caspases, and only ROS generation. However, ROS generated by NADPH oxidase was identified to be crucial in both kinds of cell death (54).

Neutrophils express adhesion factors (like CD11b containing β2-integrins) for attachment and migration from blood to other sites of injury or infection. They adhere to fibrinogen-coated plates via CD11b-fibrinogen binding, leading to integrin-triggered ROS production (55). Additionally, Siglec-E binding with the sialoglycoprotein fibrinogen further increases ROS generation via NADPH-oxidase activity, which required fibrinogen-CD11b binding. In summary, Siglec-8 in eosinophils (52) and Siglec-9/E in neutrophils (54, 55) modulate NOX activity for promoting ROS generation.

Additionally, Siglec-E-mediated β2-integrin-dependent ROS generation prevented migration of neutrophils into the lungs of mice exposed to lipopolysaccharide, which was reversed upon inhibition of NOX activity (55).

In Inflammation

In normal physiology, Siglec-sialoglycan mediated signaling modulates immune cell activation, their response, ROS release, etc for preventing excessive inflammation and tissue injury (6).

Urinary Tract Infections (UTI)

Tamm-Horsfall protein (THP, uromodulin), is the most abundant protein in urine. It is a sialoglycoprotein that binds to Siglec-9/Siglec-E. Uromodulin treatment of neutrophils leads to reduced ROS generation, lowered chemotaxis, and reduced killing of uropathogenic Escherichia coli (56). During urinary tract infections, Uromodulin-Siglec-9 interaction possibly limits excessive neutrophil infiltration, reduces ROS generation, thereby modulating tissue inflammation (Figure 1C).

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disorder (COPD)

Siglec-based regulation of ROS levels is observed in COPD patients. These patients exhibit elevated levels of the extracellular domain of Siglec-9 (soluble Siglec-9/sSiglec-9) in their plasma along with neutrophil hyperactivation, chemotaxis, and increased oxidative stress (57) (Figure 1D). Healthy neutrophils treated with sSiglec-9 in vitro show lower binding between neutrophil surface Siglec-9 and sialoglycans and thereby reducing Siglec-9 activation. This leads to increased ROS production and chemotaxis by neutrophils (57). Expression of Siglec-9 was upregulated in peripheral blood and alveolar neutrophils in COPD patients, possibly to enhance Siglec-based inhibitory signaling in response to neutrophil hyperactivation (57).

Sickle Cell Disease (SCD)

Siglec-based regulation of neutrophil activation is also seen in sickle cell disease (SCD). Neutrophils cultured with healthy erythrocytes showed lowered activation and ROS generation. Healthy erythrocytes suppress neutrophil activation by engaging with neutrophil Siglec-9 via sialylated erythrocyte membrane proteins like glycophorin A (58). In SCD, erythrocytes rapidly age, losing membrane elasticity and undergoing changes in cell membrane composition and protein expression. SCD-erythrocytes contain more SA compared to healthy erythrocytes but show lowered binding with neutrophil-Siglec-9 (59). Consequently, culturing healthy neutrophils with SCD erythrocytes leads to increased ROS release due to lowered Siglec-9 activation. Hyperactivation of neutrophils may lead to systemic inflammation, vaso-occlusion, etc. commonly observed in SCD.

Cancer Progression

Several types of cancers exhibit increased sialylation (60, 61). Neutrophils incubated with cancerous cells in vitro showed enhanced Siglec-9 engagement with cancer cell sialoglycoproteins, which increased SHP-1 recruitment. Consequently, ROS production and killing of tumor cell was inhibited (62) (Figure 1E). Mice lacking Siglec-E (murine equivalent of Siglec-9) show increased neutrophil activity, immunosurveillance, and killing of injected tumor cells (62).

Surprisingly, established tumors grew quicker in mice lacking Siglec-E. Tumor-infiltrating macrophages in such mice showed an M2 type phenotype. Depending on environmental stimuli, macrophages are activated into M1 (pro-inflammatory, eliminates tumor cells) or M2 (promotes cell proliferation, wound repair) macrophages (63). Peritoneal macrophages from mice lacking Siglec-E showed upregulation of M2 polarization markers upon co-culture with cancerous cells. Therefore, depending on the stage of cancer progression, the absence of Siglec-E can enhance cancer cell killing (by neutrophil activity like ROS generation) or promote tumor growth (by inducing macrophage M2 polarization).

Coronavirus Infections

During the COVID-19 pandemic, coronavirus infections have been linked with uncontrolled inflammatory responses, hyperactivation of neutrophils, and NETs formation (64). Incubation with serum/plasma from COVID-19 patients triggered NETosis in neutrophils from healthy donors (65, 66). Siglec-9 engagement inhibits neutrophil activity and induces apoptosis. A Siglec-9 agonist, a glycopolypeptide bearing modified SA residues and lipid moieties (pS9L), induces Siglec-9 clustering through cis interactions in macrophages after membrane insertion (28). Incubation of neutrophils with this agonist leads to ROS generation via SHP-1/2 and blocked NETosis induced by COVID-19 plasma or TLR 7/9 agonists (42). This agonist may reduce inflammation by blocking NETosis and by triggering neutrophil apoptosis through ROS generation (54).

Polysialic Acid-Based Nanoparticles

Polysialic acids serve as multivalent ligands and activate Siglecs. Treatment of neutrophils with phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate (PMA) induces NETosis and ROS generation. However, incubating neutrophils with aliphatic amine latex nanoparticles coupled to polysialic acids having <9 sialic acid residues, leads to a reduction in PMA-induced ROS levels and NETs formation (67). These polysialylated nanoparticles possibly function as ligands for neutrophil surface Siglec-5. Similarly, injection of polysialic acids having ~20 SA residues in transgenic mice prevented ROS generation by Siglec-11-expressing phagocytes. Age-related macular degeneration happens due to excessive ROS production, complement deposition which may be prevented by targeting siglec-11 via polysialic acids (68).

All these studies suggest that enhancing Siglec-sialoglycan engagement may be beneficial for controlling ROS levels in inflammatory disorders.

Neurodegenerative Diseases

Microglia are immune cells resident in the central nervous system, responsible for detecting invasive pathogens and maintaining tissue homeostasis by removing damaged, apoptotic or unnecessary synapses, neurons, and plaques. Microglial cells produce ROS following the phagocytosis of apoptotic bodies. However, oxidative stress in the central nervous system leads to neurodegenerative problems. SA content is highest in mammalian brains. Silencing Siglec-E expression in microglia confirmed that microglial Siglec-E binds to the sialylated neuronal glycocalyx to suppress ROS release following phagocytosis of neuronal debris (69). Here, Siglec-E regulates microglial ROS to prevent neurodegeneration (Figure 1F).

Early Aging

The lifespan of mammals is positively correlated with the number of CD33r Siglec genes (70). Siglecs are responsible for regulating ROS, particularly produced by activated phagocytes via NOX enzyme, during inflammatory responses. ROS possibly plays a role in early aging (71). Deletion of Siglec-E in mice resulted in shortened lifespan with increased generation of ROS and inhibition of ROS-detoxification systems (70). This correlation was confirmed across 26 species and held true for both activatory and inhibitory Siglecs (72).

Although a positive correlation exists between mammalian lifespan and siglecs, further research is needed to clearly understand how both the activatory and inhibitory siglecs are able to regulate the specific signaling pathways and receptors involved in neurodegenerative diseases.

Down-Regulation of ROS in the Infection Process Through Siglec-Sialoglycan Interaction

The capsular cell wall on Group B Streptococcus (GBS) is sialylated and associated with its virulence (73–77). These sialoglycans interact with Siglec-9 on human neutrophils for suppressing neutrophil oxidative burst and NETs formation, thus leading to enhanced bacterial survival (Figure 1G). A similar interaction was also reported with Siglec-E expressed on murine macrophages (76, 78).

Additionally, Group A Streptococcus expresses high molecular weight hyaluronan (HMW-HA). A similar sialylated molecule is also expressed on human neutrophils. Thus, Group A Streptococcus activates Siglec-9 on neutrophils through molecular mimicry to subdue ROS production, decrease NETs and apoptosis, for securing its existence inside the host (76, 79).

A few GBS strains express a non-sialylated β-protein docked on their cell wall that can efficiently engage Siglec-5 (Figure 1G). Such interaction was confirmed through the binding of SA-deficient mutant GBS with hSiglec-5-Fc. Trypsin treatment prevents this interaction by degrading the β-protein on the pathogen, indicating that binding was protein-mediated and independent of SA (75). It remains to be explored how non-sialylated proteins bind to Siglecs, as the binding site and the mechanism of such binding is still unknown. This association activated the inhibitory signaling through the engagement of SHP1/2. Thus, suppressed host immune responses like oxidative burst, repressed phagocytic activity, and extracellular traps in the leucocytes, thereby favoring pathogen persistence (75).

Likewise, we had reported the presence of SA in Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) and identified a few sialoglycoproteins by mass spectrometry (80). These sialoglycoproteins interact with several human Siglecs via SA to enhance their pathogenicity (81–83). Interaction of PA-SA with inhibitory Siglec-9 on neutrophils reduced ROS production, elastase release, and decreased NETs formation, which altogether suppressed the activation of these immune cells (Figure 1G). Moreover, the association of the bacterial SA with murine Siglec-E on macrophages exhibited enhanced phagocytosis but reduced oxidative burst (Figure 1H) (83).

Our group also had demonstrated that Leishmania donovani, the causative agent of Indian visceral leishmaniasis displays different derivatives of sialic acid on its cell surface (84). Subsequently, it was also shown that various strains of Leishmania species causing different forms of the disease exhibited a differential distribution of SA on their surface. Binding studies of sialylated virulent L.donovani strain with soluble siglec-Fc chimeras displayed its high interaction only with Siglec-1 and Siglec-5. Furthermore, we also reported that these parasites interact with Siglec-E on murine macrophages to subvert the host immune response (85, 86). ROS production and other macrophage effector functions were upregulated by silencing Siglec-E, which ultimately diminished the parasite survival inside the host (83). This indicates that Siglec-E suppresses ROS production in parasite-infected macrophages (Figure 1H).

All this information supports the well-established immune-inhibitory role of Siglecs in the promotion of pathogen survival and disease progression. Thus, Siglecs at the host-pathogen interface can play a very important role in modulating the immune response through regulating ROS production in the immune cells.

Discussion

The crucial role of Siglec-sialoglycan interactions in regulating immune and inflammatory responses is increasingly becoming relevant. Siglecs are being recognized as potential therapeutic targets in various inflammatory disorders and cancer  (87, 88). Strategies to target activatory or inhibitory Siglecs for regulating immune response involve modulation of overall sialylation, use of antibodies, or sialic acid mimetics (89–93).

Several studies demonstrate that Siglec-sialoglycan interactions additionally promote as well as inhibit ROS generation to control diverse cellular functions ranging from apoptosis to maintenance of cellular life-spans. Such interactions may be beneficial for modulating oxidative stress as a part of anti-tumor, anti-inflammatory therapy. Siglecs may induce immune-tolerance or suppress inflammation by depleting ROS-producing cells or inhibiting ROS release. A few Siglec agonists which enhanced Siglec-based suppression of ROS production in inflammatory disorders have already been demonstrated  (28, 42, 67–69).

However, the consequence of Siglec-sialoglycan interaction may vary depending upon the location of Siglec and the presence of its cognate ligand in the surroundings. Also, some of the Siglecs have redundant roles. More comprehensive studies are required to define the outcome of such signaling events before siglecs may be used as therapeutic agents. In this respect, the role of Siglec-sialoglycan interactions and protein-protein interactions in Siglec-based ROS regulation needs to be explored in detail.

Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

• 1

  SchauerRKamerlingJP. Exploration of the Sialic Acid World. Adv Carbohydr Chem Biochem (2018) 75:1–213. doi: 10.1016/bs.accb.2018.09.001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 2

  CrockerPRClarkEAFilbinMGordonSJonesYKehrlJHet al. Siglecs: A Family of Sialic-Acid Binding Lectins. Glycobiol (1998) 8:v. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.glycob.a018832

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 3

  LübbersJRodríguezEvan KooykY. Modulation of Immune Tolerance via Siglec-Sialic Acid Interactions. Front Immunol (2018) 9:2807. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.02807

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 4

  GianchecchiEArenaAFierabracciA. Sialic Acid-Siglec Axis in Human Immune Regulation, Involvement in Autoimmunity and Cancer and Potential Therapeutic Treatments. Int J Mol Sci (2021) 22:5774. doi: 10.3390/ijms22115774

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 5

  SelemidisS. Targeting Reactive Oxygen Species for Respiratory Infection: Fact Or Fancy? Respirol (2019) 24:15–6. doi: 10.1111/resp.13417

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 6

  NovaesRDTeixeiraALde MirandaAS. Oxidative Stress in Microbial Diseases: Pathogen, Host, and Therapeutics. Oxid Med Cell Longev (2019) 2019:8159562. doi: 10.1155/2019/8159562

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7

  von GuntenSBochnerBS. Basic and Clinical Immunology of Siglecs. Ann N Y Acad Sci (2008) 1143:61–82. doi: 10.1196/annals.1443.011

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8

  NguyenDHHurtado-ZiolaNGagneuxPVarkiA. Loss of Siglec Expression on T Lymphocytes During Human Evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2006) 103:7765–70. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0510484103

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 9

  LäubliHVarkiA. Sialic Acid-Binding Immunoglobulin-Like Lectins (Siglecs) Detect Self-Associated Molecular Patterns to Regulate Immune Responses. Cell Mol Life Sci (2020) 77:593–605. doi: 10.1007/s00018-019-03288-x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 10

  SmithBAHBertozziCR. The Clinical Impact of Glycobiology: Targeting Selectins, Siglecs and Mammalian Glycans. Nat Rev Drug Discovery (2021) 20:217–43. doi: 10.1038/s41573-020-00093-1

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 11

  LinCHYehYCYangKD. Functions and Therapeutic Targets of Siglec-Mediated Infections, Inflammations and Cancers. J Formos Med Assoc (2021) 120:5–24. doi: 10.1016/j.jfma.2019.10.019

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 12

  VarkiAAngataT. Siglecs–the Major Subfamily of I-Type Lectins. Glycobiol (2006) 16:1R–27R. doi: 10.1093/glycob/cwj008

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 13

  DuanSPaulsonJC. Siglecs as Immune Cell Checkpoints in Disease. Annu Rev Immunol (2020) 38:365–95. doi: 10.1146/annurev-immunol-102419-035900

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 14

  CrockerPRPaulsonJCVarkiA. Siglecs and Their Roles in the Immune System. Nat Rev Immunol (2007) 7:255–66. doi: 10.1038/nri2056

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 15

  Perez-ZsoltDMartinez-PicadoJIzquierdo-UserosN. When Dendritic Cells Go Viral: The Role of Siglec-1 in Host Defense and Dissemination of Enveloped Viruses. Viruses (2019) 12:8. doi: 10.3390/v12010008

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 16

  MacauleyMSCrockerPRPaulsonJC. Siglec-Mediated Regulation of Immune Cell Function in Disease. Nat Rev Immunol (2014) 14:653–66. doi: 10.1038/nri3737

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 17

  YokoiHMyersAMatsumotoKCrockerPRSaitoHBochnerBS. Alteration and Acquisition of Siglecs During In Vitro Maturation of CD34+ Progenitors Into Human Mast Cells. Allergy (2006) 61:769–76. doi: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2006.01133.x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 18

  TobaKHanawaHFuseISakaueMWatanabeKUesugiYet al. Difference in CD22 Molecules in Human B Cells and Basophils. Exp Hematol (2002) 30:205–11. doi: 10.1016/s0301-472x(01)00791-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 19

  WenTMinglerMKBlanchardCWahlBPabstORothenbergME. The Pan-B Cell Marker CD22 Is Expressed on Gastrointestinal Eosinophils and Negatively Regulates Tissue Eosinophilia. J Immunol (2012) 188:1075–82. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1102222

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 20

  ClarkEAGiltiayNV. CD22: A Regulator of Innate and Adaptive B Cell Responses and Autoimmunity. Front Immunol (2018) 9:2235. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.02235

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 21

  BornhöfftKFGoldammerTReblAGaluskaSP. Siglecs: A Journey Through the Evolution of Sialic Acid-Binding Immunoglobulin-Type Lectins. Dev Comp Immunol (2018) 86:219–31. doi: 10.1016/j.dci.2018.05.008

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 22

  Gonzalez-GilASchnaarRL. Siglec Ligands. Cells (2021) 10:1260. doi: 10.3390/cells10051260

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23

  ZhangJQNicollGJonesCCrockerPR. Siglec-9, A Novel Sialic Acid Binding Member of the Immunoglobulin Superfamily Expressed Broadly on Human Blood Leukocytes. J Biol Chem (2000) 275:22121–6. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M002788200

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 24

  YamakawaNYasudaYYoshimuraAGoshimaACrockerPRVergotenGet al. Discovery of a New Sialic Acid Binding Region That Regulates Siglec-7. Sci Rep (2020) 10:8647. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-64887-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 25

  AvrilTAttrillHZhangJRaperACrockerPR. Negative Regulation of Leucocyte Functions by CD33-Related Siglecs. Biochem Soc Trans (2006) 34:1024–7. doi: 10.1042/BST0341024

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 26

  CollinsBEPaulsonJC. Cell Surface Biology Mediated by Low Affinity Multivalent Protein-Glycan Interactions. Curr Opin Chem Biol (2004) 8:617–25. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2004.10.004

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 27

  O'ReillyMKPaulsonJC. Multivalent Ligands for Siglecs. Methods Enzymol (2010) 478:343–63. doi: 10.1016/S0076-6879(10)78017-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 28

  DelaverisCSChiuSHRileyNMBertozziCR. Modulation of Immune Cell Reactivity With Cis-Binding Siglec Agonists. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2021) 118:e2012408118. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2012408118

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 29

  GasparriniFFeestCBruckbauerAMattilaPKMüllerJNitschkeLet al. Nanoscale Organization and Dynamics of the Siglec CD22 Cooperate With the Cytoskeleton in Restraining BCR Signalling. EMBO J (2016) 35:258–80. doi: 10.15252/embj.201593027

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 30

  AngataT. Siglecs That Associate With DAP12. Adv Exp Med Biol (2020) 1204:215–30. doi: 10.1007/978-981-15-1580-4_9

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 31

  CaoHCrockerPR. Evolution of CD33-Related Siglecs: Regulating Host Immune Functions and Escaping Pathogen Exploitation? Immunol (2011) 132:18–26. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2567

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32

  NogueiraVHayN. Molecular Pathways: Reactive Oxygen Species Homeostasis in Cancer Cells and Implications for Cancer Therapy. Clin Cancer Res (2013) 19:4309–14. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-1424

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 33

  SegalAW. The Function of the NADPH Oxidase of Phagocytes and Its Relationship to Other Noxs in Plants, Invertebrates, And Mammals. Int J Biochem Cell Biol (2008) 40:604–18. doi: 10.1016/j.biocel.2007.10.003

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 34

  CachatJDeffertCHuguesSKrauseKH. Phagocyte NADPH Oxidase and Specific Immunity. Clin Sci (Lond) (2015) 128:635–48. doi: 10.1042/CS20140635

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 35

  RomaEHMacedoJPGoesGRGonçalvesJLCastroWDCisalpinoDet al. Impact of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) on the Control of Parasite Loads and Inflammation in Leishmania Amazonensis Infection. Parasit Vectors (2016) 9:193. doi: 10.1186/s13071-016-1472-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 36

  BabiorBM. NADPH Oxidase: An Update. Blood (1999) 93:1464–76. doi: 10.1182/blood.V93.5.1464

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 37

  ShatwellKPSegalAW. NADPH Oxidase. Int J Biochem Cell Biol (1996) 28:1191–5. doi: 10.1016/s1357-2725(96)00084-2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 38

  AaltoKAutioAKissEAElimaKNymalmYVeresTZet al. Siglec-9 Is a Novel Leukocyte Ligand for Vascular Adhesion Protein-1 and Can be Used in PET Imaging of Inflammation and Cancer. Blood (2011) 118:3725–33. doi: 10.1182/blood-2010-09-311076

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 39

  ElovaaraHParkashVFair-MäkeläRSalo-AhenOMGuédezGBligt-LindénEet al. Multivalent Interactions of Human Primary Amine Oxidase With the V and C2₂ Domains of Sialic Acid-Binding Immunoglobulin-Like Lectin-9 Regulate Its Binding and Amine Oxidase Activity. PloS One (2016) 11:e0166935. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0166935

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 40

  Lopes de CarvalhoLElovaaraHde RuyckJVergotenGJalkanenSGuédezGet al. Mapping the Interaction Site and Effect of the Siglec-9 Inflammatory Biomarker On Human Primary Amine Oxidase. Sci Rep (2018) 1(8):2086. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-20618-4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 41

  WuYYangDLiuRWangLChenGY. Selective Response to Bacterial Infection by Regulating Siglec-E Expression. iScience (2020) 23:101473. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2020.101473

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 42

  DelaverisCSWilkAJRileyNMStarkJCYangSSRogersAJet al. Synthetic Siglec-9 Agonists Inhibit Neutrophil Activation Associated With COVID-19. ACS Cent Sci (2021) 7:650–7. doi: 10.1021/acscentsci.0c01669

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 43

  NutkuEAizawaHHudsonSABochnerBS. Ligation of Siglec-8: A Selective Mechanism For Induction of Human Eosinophil Apoptosis. Blood (2003) 101:5014–20. doi: 10.1182/blood-2002-10-3058

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 44

  NutkuEHudsonSABochnerBS. Mechanism of Siglec-8-Induced Human Eosinophil Apoptosis: Role of Caspases and Mitochondrial Injury. Biochem Biophys Res Commun (2005) 336:918–24. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2005.08.202

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 45

  Nutku-BilirEHudsonSABochnerBS. Interleukin-5 Priming of Human Eosinophils Alters Siglec-8 Mediated Apoptosis Pathways. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol (2008) 1:121–4. doi: 10.1165/rcmb.2007-0154OC

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 46

  KanoGAlmananMBochnerBSZimmermannN. Mechanism of Siglec-8-Mediated Cell Death in IL-5-Activated Eosinophils: Role for Reactive Oxygen Species-Enhanced MEK/ERK Activation. J Allergy Clin Immunol (2013) 132:437–45. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2013.03.024

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 47

  KanoGBochnerBSZimmermannN. Regulation of Siglec-8-Induced Intracellular Reactive Oxygen Species Production and Eosinophil Cell Death by Src Family Kinases. Immunobiol (2017) 222:343–9. doi: 10.1016/j.imbio.2016.09.006

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 48

  NaHJHudsonSABochnerBS. IL-33 Enhances Siglec-8 Mediated Apoptosis of Human Eosinophils. Cytokine (2012) 57:169–74. doi: 10.1016/j.cyto.2011.10.007

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 49

  FaridSSHMirshafieyARazaviA. Siglec-8 and Siglec-F, the New Therapeutic Targets in Asthma. Immunopharmacol Immunotoxicol (2012) 34:721–6. doi: 10.3109/08923973.2011.589453

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 50

  TatenoHCrockerPRPaulsonJC. Mouse Siglec-F and Human Siglec-8 are Functionally Convergent Paralogs That Are Selectively Expressed on Eosinophils and Recognize 6'-Sulfo-Sialyl Lewis X as a Preferred Glycan Ligand. Glycobiology (2005) 15:1125–35. doi: 10.1093/glycob/cwi097

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 51

  MaoHKanoGHudsonSABrummetMZimmermannNZhuZet al. Mechanisms of Siglec-F-Induced Eosinophil Apoptosis: A Role for Caspases But Not for SHP-1, Src Kinases, NADPH Oxidase or Reactive Oxygen. PloS One (2013) 8:e68143. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0068143

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 52

  CarrollDJO'SullivanJANixDBCaoYTiemeyerMBochnerBS. Sialic Acid-Binding Immunoglobulin-Like Lectin 8 (Siglec-8) Is an Activating Receptor Mediating β2-Integrin-Dependent Function in Human Eosinophils. J Allergy Clin Immunol (2018) 141:2196–207. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2017.08.013

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 53

  KolaczkowskaEKubesP. Neutrophil Recruitment and Function in Health and Inflammation. Nat Rev Immunol (2013) 13:159–75. doi: 10.1038/nri3399

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 54

  von GuntenSYousefiSSeitzMJakobSMSchaffnerTSegerRet al. Siglec-9 Transduces Apoptotic and Nonapoptotic Death Signals Into Neutrophils Depending on the Proinflammatory Cytokine Environment. Blood (2005) 106:1423–31. doi: 10.1182/blood-2004-10-4112

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 55

  McMillanSJSharmaRSRichardsHEHegdeVCrockerPR. Siglec-E Promotes B2-Integrin-Dependent NADPH Oxidase Activation to Suppress Neutrophil Recruitment to the Lung. J Biol Chem (2014) 289:20370–6. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M114.574624

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 56

  PatrasKACoadyAOlsonJAliSRRamachandraRaoSPKumarSet al. Tamm-Horsfall Glycoprotein Engages Human Siglec-9 to Modulate Neutrophil Activation in the Urinary Tract. Immunol Cell Biol (2017) 95:960–5. doi: 10.1038/icb.2017.63

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 57

  ZengZLiMWangMWuXLiQNingQet al. Increased Expression of Siglec-9 in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Sci Rep (2017) 7:10116. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-09120-5

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 58

  LizcanoASecundinoIDöhrmannSCorridenRRohenaCDiazSet al. A. Erythrocyte Sialoglycoproteins Engage Siglec-9 on Neutrophils to Suppress Activation. Blood (2017) 129:3100–10. doi: 10.1182/blood-2016-11-751636

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 59

  KiserZMLizcanoANguyenJBeckerGLBelcherJDVarkiAPet al. Decreased Erythrocyte Binding of Siglec-9 Increases Neutrophil Activation in Sickle Cell Disease. Blood Cells Mol Dis (2020) 81:102399. doi: 10.1016/j.bcmd.2019.102399

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 60

  MandalCChatterjeeMSinhaD. Investigation of 9-O-Acetylated Sialoglycoconjugates in Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia. Br J Haematol (2000) 110:801–12. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2141.2000.02105.x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 61

  SinhaDMandalCBhattacharyaDK. Identification of 9-O Acetyl Sialoglycoconjugates (9-OAcSGs) as Biomarkers in Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Using a Lectin, AchatininH, as a Probe. Leukemia (1999) 13:119–25. doi: 10.1038/sj.leu.2401239

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 62

  LäubliHPearceOMSchwarzFSiddiquiSSDengLStanczakMAet al. Engagement of Myelomonocytic Siglecs by Tumor-Associated Ligands Modulates the Innate Immune Response to Cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2014) 111:14211–6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1409580111

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 63

  SicaALarghiPMancinoARubinoLPortaCTotaroMGet al. Macrophage Polarization in Tumour Progression. Semin Cancer Biol (2008) 18:349–55. doi: 10.1016/j.semcancer.2008.03.004

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 64

  ThierryARRochB. Neutrophil Extracellular Traps and By-Products Play a Key Role in COVID-19: Pathogenesis, Risk Factors, and Therapy. J Clin Med (2020) 9:2942. doi: 10.3390/jcm9092942

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 65

  ZuoYYalavarthiSShiHGockmanKZuoMMadisonJAet al. Neutrophil Extracellular Traps in COVID-19. JCI Insight (2020) 5(11):e138999. doi: 10.1172/jci.insight.138999

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 66

  MiddletonEAHeXYDenormeFCampbellRANgDSalvatoreSPet al. Neutrophil Extracellular Traps Contribute to Immunothrombosis in COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. Blood (2020) 136(10):1169–79. doi: 10.1182/blood.2020007008

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 67

  BornhöfftKFViergutzTKühnleAGaluskaSP. Nanoparticles Equipped With α2,8-Linked Sialic Acid Chains Inhibit the Release of Neutrophil Extracellular Traps. Nanomaterials (Basel) (2019) 9:610. doi: 10.3390/nano9040610

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 68

  KarlstetterMKopatzJAslanidisAShahrazACaramoyALinnartz-GerlachBet al. Polysialic Acid Blocks Mononuclear Phagocyte Reactivity, Inhibits Complement Activation, and Protects From Vascular Damage In The Retina. EMBO Mol Med (2017) 9:154–66. doi: 10.15252/emmm.201606627

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 69

  ClaudeJLinnartz-GerlachBKudinAPKunzWSNeumannH. Microglial CD33-Related Siglec-E Inhibits Neurotoxicity by Preventing the Phagocytosis-Associated Oxidative Burst. J Neurosci (2013) 33:18270–6. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2211-13.2013

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 70

  SchwarzFPearceOMWangXSamrajANLäubliHGarciaJOet al. Siglec Receptors Impact Mammalian Lifespan by Modulating Oxidative Stress. Elife (2015) 4:e06184. doi: 10.7554/eLife.06184

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 71

  LiguoriIRussoGCurcioFBulliGAranLDella-MorteDet al. Oxidative Stress, Aging, and Diseases. Clin Interv Aging (2018) 13:757–72. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S158513

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 72

  KhanNKimSKGagneuxPDuganLLVarkiA. Maximum Reproductive Lifespan Correlates With CD33rSIGLEC Gene Number: Implications for NADPH Oxidase-Derived Reactive Oxygen Species in Aging. FASEB J (2020) 34:1928–38. doi: 10.1096/fj.201902116R

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 73

  UchiyamaSSunJFukahoriKAndoNWuMSchwarzFet al. Dual Actions of Group B Streptococcus Capsular Sialic Acid Provide Resistance to Platelet-Mediated Antimicrobial Killing. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2019) 116:7465–70. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1815572116.

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 74

  CarlinAFLewisALVarkiANizetV. Group B Streptococcal Capsular Sialic Acids Interact With Siglecs (Immunoglobulin-Like Lectins) on Human Leukocytes. J Bacteriol (2007) 189:1231–7. doi: 10.1128/JB.01155-06

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 75

  CarlinAFChangYCAreschougTLindahlGHurtado-ZiolaNKingCCet al. B Streptococcus Suppression of Phagocyte Functions by Protein-Mediated Engagement of Human Siglec-5. J Exp Med (2009) 206:1691–9. doi: 10.1084/jem.20090691

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 76

  CarlinAFUchiyamaSChangYCLewisALNizetVVarkiA. Molecular Mimicry of Host Sialylated Glycans Allows a Bacterial Pathogen to Engage Neutrophil Siglec-9 and Dampen the Innate Immune Response. Blood (2009) 113:3333–6. doi: 10.1182/blood-2008-11-187302

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 77

  WesselsMRRubensCEBenedíVJKasperDL. Definition of a Bacterial Virulence Factor: Sialylation of the Group B Streptococcal Capsule. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (1989) 86:8983–7. doi: 10.1073/pnas.86.22.8983

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 78

  ChangYCOlsonJBeasleyFCTungCZhangJCrockerPRet al. Group B Streptococcus Engages An Inhibitory Siglec Through Sialic Acid Mimicry to Blunt Innate Immune and Inflammatory Responses In Vivo. PloS Pathog (2014) 10:e1003846. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1003846

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 79

  SecundinoILizcanoARoupéKMWangXColeJNOlsonJet al. Host and Pathogen Hyaluronan Signal Through Human Siglec-9 to Suppress Neutrophil Activation. J Mol Med (Berl) (2016) 94:219–33. doi: 10.1007/s00109-015-1341-8

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 80

  KhatuaBVan VleetJChoudhuryBPChaudhryRMandalC. Sialylation of Outer Membrane Porin Protein D: A Mechanistic Basis of Antibiotic Uptake in Pseudomonas Aeruginosa. Mol Cell Proteomics (2014) 13:1412–28. doi: 10.1074/mcp.M113.030999

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 81

  KhatuaBGhoshalABhattacharyaKMandalCSahaBCrockerPRet al. Sialic Acids Acquired by Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Are Involved in Reduced Complement Deposition and Siglec Mediated Host-Cell Recognition. FEBS Lett (2010) 584:555–61. doi: 10.1016/j.febslet.2009.11.087

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 82

  KhatuaBBhattacharyaKMandalC. Sialoglycoproteins Adsorbed by Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Facilitate Their Survival by Impeding Neutrophil Extracellular Trap Through Siglec-9. J Leukoc Biol (2012) 91:641–55. doi: 10.1189/jlb.0511260.

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 83

  MukherjeeKKhatuaBMandalC. Sialic Acid-Siglec-E Interactions During Pseudomonas Aeruginosa Infection of Macrophages Interferes With Phagosome Maturation by Altering Intracellular Calcium Concentrations. Front Immunol (2020) 11:332. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.00332

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 84

  ChatterjeeMChavaAKKohlaGPalSMerlingAHinderlichSet al. Identification and Characterization of Adsorbed Serum Sialoglycans on Leishmania Donovani Promastigotes. Glycobiol (2003) 13:351–61. doi: 10.1093/glycob/cwg027

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 85

  RoySMandalC. Leishmania Donovani Utilize Sialic Acids for Binding and Phagocytosis in the Macrophages Through Selective Utilization of Siglecs and Impair the Innate Immune Arm. PloS Negl Trop Dis (2016) 10:e0004904. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004904

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 86

  KarmakarJMandalC. Interplay Between Sialic Acids, Siglec-E, and Neu1 Regulates MyD88- and TRIF-Dependent Pathways for TLR4-Activation During Leishmania Donovani Infection. Front Immunol (2021) 12:626110. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.626110

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 87

  LenzaMPAtxabalUOyenarteIJiménez-BarberoJEreño-OrbeaJ. Current Status on Therapeutic Molecules Targeting Siglec Receptors. Cells (2020) 9:2691. doi: 10.3390/cells9122691

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 88

  O'ReillyMKPaulsonJC. Siglecs as Targets for Therapy in Immune-Cell-Mediated Disease. Trends Pharmacol Sci (2009) 30:240–8. doi: 10.1016/j.tips.2009.02.005

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 89

  StanczakMASiddiquiSSTrefnyMPThommenDSBoliganKFvon GuntenSet al. Self-Associated Molecular Patterns Mediate Cancer Immune Evasion by Engaging Siglecs on T Cells. J Clin Invest (2018) 128(11):4912–23. doi: 10.1172/JCI120612

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 90

  PerdicchioMCornelissenLAStreng-OuwehandIEngelsSVerstegeMIBoonLet al. Tumor Sialylation Impedes T Cell Mediated Anti-Tumor Responses While Promoting Tumor Associated-Regulatory T Cells. Oncotarget (2016) 7(8):8771–82. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.6822

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 91

  GrayMAStanczakMAMantuanoNRXiaoHPijnenborgJFAMalakerSAet al. Targeted Glycan Degradation Potentiates the Anticancer Immune Response In Vivo. Nat Chem Biol (2020) 16(12):1376–84. doi: 10.1038/s41589-020-0622-x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 92

  SchweizerAWohnerMPrescherHBrossmerRNitschkeL. Targeting of CD22-Positive B-Cell Lymphoma Cells by Synthetic Divalent Sialic Acid Analogues. Eur J Immunol (2012) 42(10):2792–802. doi: 10.1002/eji.201242574

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 93

  PrescherHSchweizerAKuhfeldtENitschkeLBrossmerR. Discovery of Multifold Modified Sialosides as Human CD22/ Siglec-2 Ligands With Nanomolar Activity on B-Cells. ACS Chem Biol (2014) 9(7):1444–50. doi: 10.1021/cb400952v

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar