4.5 Article

Pathogenic anti-DNA antibodies modulate gene expression in mesangial cells: Involvement of HMGB1 in anti-DNA antibody-induced renal injury

期刊

IMMUNOLOGY LETTERS
卷 121, 期 1, 页码 61-73

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.imlet.2008.08.007

关键词

Systemic lupus erythematosus; Autoantibodies; Inflammation

资金

  1. NIH [RO1 AR48692, PO1 AI51392]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although anti-DNA antibodies have been decisively linked to the pathogenesis of lupus nephritis, the mechanisms have not been conclusively determined. Recently, we reported that anti-DNA antibodies may contribute to kidney damage by upregulation of proinflammatory genes in mesangial cells (MC), a process involving both Fc receptor-dependent and independent pathways. In investigating the mechanism by which pathogenic anti-DNA antibodies modulate gene expression in MC, we found that the pathogenic anti-DNA antibody 1A3F bound to high mobility group binding protein I (HMGB1), an endogenous ligand for TLR2/4 and RAGE (receptor for advanced glycation end products). Interestingly, HMGB1 treatment of MC induced a similar pattern of genes as stimulation with 1A3F. Furthermore, HMGB1 and 1A3F exhibited a synergistic proinflammatory effect in the kidney, where increased expression of HMGB1 was found in lupus patients but not in patients with other types of renal disease. TLR2/Fc and RAGE/Fc inhibited the proinflammatory effects of 1A3F on MC. Finally, we found enhanced susceptibility of lupus prone MRL-lpr/lpr (MRL/lpr) as compared to normal BALB/c derived MC to pathogenic anti-DNA antibody and LPS stimulation (in particular enhanced chemokine synthesis), in addition to significantly increased expression of TLR4. Our results suggest that gene upregulation in MC induced by nephritogenic anti-DNA antibodies is TLR2/4 and RAGE-dependent. Finally, HMGB1 may act as a proinflammatory mediator in antibody-induced kidney damage in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据