LRBA deficiency
rare genetic disorder of the immune system
LRBA deficiency is a rare genetic disorder of the immune system. This disorder is caused by a mutation in the gene LRBA. LRBA stands for “lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-responsive and beige-like anchor protein”. This condition is characterized by autoimmunity, lymphoproliferation, and immune deficiency. It was first described by Gabriela Lopez-Herrera from University College London in 2012. Investigators in the laboratory of Dr. Michael Lenardo at National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the National Institutes of Health and Dr. Michael Jordan at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center later described this condition and therapy in 2015.
Signs and symptoms
LRBA deficiency presents as a syndrome of autoimmunity, lymphoproliferation, and humoral immune deficiency. Predominant clinical problems include idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA), and an autoimmune enteropathy. Before the discovery of these gene mutations, patients were diagnosed with common variable immune deficiency (CVID), which is characterized by low antibody levels and recurrent infections.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “LRBA deficiency” is rare genetic disorder of the immune system. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through LRBA, deficiency and rare, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “rare genetic disorder of the immune system” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 16, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q25111549. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2012 and 2015.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “LRBA deficiency”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow LRBA deficiency primary sources, LRBA deficiency archive and LRBA research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “LRBA deficiency”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “LRBA deficiency” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.