Fig. 1: EGFR pathway is essential for Th9 cell differentiation.
From: EGFR-HIF1α signaling positively regulates the differentiation of IL-9 producing T helper cells
a Naïve CD4+ T cells from WT mice were in vitro differentiated into Th0 and Th9 followed by RNA-Seq and ingenuity pathway analysis. b qPCR analysis of Egfr expression. Data are representative of mean ± SEM from three independent experiments. c, d Naïve CD4+ T cells from WT and Egfrflox/floxXCd4-cre mice were in vitro differentiated under Th0 and Th9 polarizing conditions for 3 days followed by c. NanoString analysis. Fold change in relative expression relative to control was determined by log2 (Th9 Egfrflox/floxXCd4-cre/Th9 WT). d qPCR analysis of Il9 expression and ELISA for IL-9 production. Data are representative of mean ± SEM from three independent experiments. e, f Naïve CD4+ T cells from WT mice were in vitro differentiated under Th9 polarizing conditions with or without 10 ng/ml IL-33 or 10 ng/ml TSLP for 3 days respectively; e qPCR analysis of Il9, Egfr expression and f ELISA for IL-9. Data are representative of mean ± SEM from three independent experiments. g Naïve CD4+ T cells from WT and Nos2−/− mice were differentiated under Th9 polarizing conditions followed by qPCR analysis of Il9 and Egfr expression and ELISA for IL-9. Data are representative of mean ± SEM from three independent experiments. h Naïve CD4+ T cells from WT and Egfrflox/floxXCd4-cre mice were differentiated under Th9 polarizing conditions with or without 10 ng/ml IL-33 for 3 days; qPCR analysis of Il9 expression and ELISA for IL-9. Data are representative of mean ± SEM from three independent experiments. i Naïve CD4+ T cells from WT and Egfrflox/floxXCd4-cre mice were differentiated to Th9 followed by qPCR analysis of Il33r expression. Data are representative of mean ± SEM from three independent experiments. b **P = 0.007, using two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. d *P = 0.033, ****P < 0.00001, ***P = 0.0007, using two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison test. e, f *P = 0.04, **P = 0.002, ****P < 0.0001, using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison test. g **P = 0.003, ***P = 0.0009, *P = 0.01, using two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. h *P = 0.05, ***P = 0.0009, **P = 0.001, ****P = 0.0001, using two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison test. i P = ns (not significant), using two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test.
