4.4 Article

Hematopoietic Stem-Progenitor Cells Restore Immunoreactivity and Improve Survival in Late Sepsis

期刊

INFECTION AND IMMUNITY
卷 80, 期 2, 页码 602-611

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/IAI.05480-11

关键词

-

资金

  1. East Tennessee State University College of Medicine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sepsis progresses from an early/acute hyperinflammatory to a late/chronic hypoinflammatory phase with immunosuppression. As a result of this phenotypic switch, mortality in late sepsis from persistent primary infection or opportunistic new infection often exceeds that in acute sepsis. Emerging data support that persistence of the hypoinflammatory (hyporesponsive) effector immune cells during late sepsis might involve alterations in myeloid differentiation/maturation that generate circulating repressor macrophages that do not readily clear active infection. Here, we used a cecal ligation and puncture (CLP) murine model of prolonged sepsis to show that adoptive transfer of CD34(+) hematopoietic stem-progenitor cells after CLP improves long-term survival by 65%. CD34(+) cell transfer corrected the immunosuppression of late sepsis by (i) producing significantly higher levels of proinflammatory mediators upon ex vivo stimulation with the Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) agonist lipopolysaccharide, (ii) enhancing phagocytic activity of peritoneal macrophages, and (iii) clearing bacterial peritonitis. Improved immunity by CD34(+) cell transfer decreased inflammatory peritoneal exudate of surviving late-sepsis mice. Cell tracking experiments showed that the transferred CD34(+) cells first appeared in the bone marrow and then homed to the spleen and peritoneum. Because CD34(+) cells did not affect the early-phase hyperinflammatory response, it is likely that the newly incorporated pluripotent CD34(+) cells differentiated into competent immune cells in blood and tissue, thereby reversing or replacing the hyporesponsive endotoxintolerant cells that occur and persist after the initiation of early sepsis.

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

4.4
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