4.5 Article

ICAM-1 and VCAM-1 are differentially expressed on blood-retinal barrier cells during experimental autoimmune uveitis

Journal

EXPERIMENTAL EYE RESEARCH
Volume 137, Issue -, Pages 94-102

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.exer.2015.06.017

Keywords

Autoimmunity; Uveitis; Blood retina barrier; EAU; IRBP

Categories

Funding

  1. ARVO foundation
  2. Association Vesale
  3. Region Bruxelles Capitale
  4. funds for research in ophthalmology (FRO)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Adhesion molecules play a central role in leukocyte adhesion to the blood-retinal barrier (BRB) during uveitis. VCAM-1 expression on the BRB has been already described but although structurally similar, ICAM-1 has shown in various autoimmunity models to have distinct role and expression. Here, we induced uveitis in C57Bl/6 mice by adoptive transfer of semi-purified T cells from IRBP1-20-immunized mice. Using Flow cytometry analysis on transferred cells and immunofluorescence staining on retina we have studied the comparative ocular expression of both ICAM-1 and VCAM-1 and their ligands LFA-1 and VLA-4 at the surface of uveitogenic cells. Our results showed that LFA-1 and VLA-4 are expressed on both T and non T cells, VLA-4 sparsely and LFA-1 ubiquitously. Considering retinal expression, ICAM-1 is faintly present and VCAM-1 is absent in naive eyes. Only ICAM-1 is present on infiltrating cells in the retina and vitreous, while only VCAM-1 extends to perivascular glial cells and all along the internal limiting membrane. Finally, ICAM-1 is strongly expressed on the RPE, where VCAM-1 expression is much weaker. VCAM-1 seems most strongly expressed on the internal BRB while ICAM-1 predominates on the external BRB. Those major differences in the expression pattern could represent differential entry pathways for inflammatory cells to penetrate the eye. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available