4.6 Article

IL-17A Promotes the Exacerbation of IL-33-Induced Airway Hyperresponsiveness by Enhancing Neutrophilic Inflammation via CXCR2 Signaling in Mice

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 192, 期 4, 页码 1372-1384

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.1301538

关键词

-

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science [23790164, 23590093]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [25460180, 23790164, 23590093] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Neutrophilic airway inflammation is a hallmark of patients with severe asthma. Although we have reported that both IL-33 and IL-17A contributed to IgE-mediated neutrophilic inflammation in mice, the relationship remains unclear. In this article, we examined how IL-17A modifies IL-33-induced neutrophilic inflammation and airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR). IL-33 was intratracheally administered to BALB/c mice on days 0-2; furthermore, on day 7, the effect of the combination of IL-33 and IL-17A was evaluated. Compared with IL-33 or IL-17A alone, the combination exacerbated neutrophilic inflammation and AHR, associated with more increased levels of lung glutamic acid-leucine-arginine(+) depletion of neutrophils suppressed AHR. These findings prompted us to examine the role of CXCR2 in IgE-sensitized mice; a single treatment with anti-CXCR2 mAb in the seventh Ag challenge inhibited late-phase airway obstruction, AHR, and neutrophilic inflammation. In addition to inhibition, multiple treatments during the fourth to seventh challenge attenuated early-phase airway obstruction, eosinophilic inflammation, and goblet cell hyperplasia associated with the reduction of Th2 cytokine production, including IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13. Collectively, IL-33 cooperated with IL-17A to exacerbate AHR by enhancing neutrophilic inflammation via CXCR2 signaling; furthermore, CXCR2 signaling derived Th2 responses. We thus suggest the underlying mechanisms of IL-33 and IL-17A in allergic asthma and CXCR2 as potential therapeutic targets for the disease.

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

4.6
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