4.7 Article

The Differential Effect of High and Low Molecular Weight Fucoidans on the Severity of Collagen-induced Arthritis in Mice

期刊

PHYTOTHERAPY RESEARCH
卷 24, 期 9, 页码 1384-1391

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/ptr.3140

关键词

arthritis; fucoidan; inflammation; macrophage

资金

  1. Korean Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy [70001180]
  2. Korea Institute of Industrial Technology(KITECH) [70001180] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fucoidans have been extensively studied for their various biological activities but the exact role of fucoidans on the inflammatory processes associated with arthritic disease has not been studied. The effect of the treatment of high, medium and low molecular weight fucoidans (HMWF, MMWF and LMWF, respectively) on the progression of collagen-induced arthritis (CIA) was tested. A daily oral administration of HMWF enhanced the severity of arthritis, inflammatory responses in the joint cartilage and the levels of collagen-specific antibodies, while LMWF reduced the severity of arthritis and the levels of Th1-dependent collagen-specific IgG(2a). Further in vitro analyses, using macrophage cell lines, revealed that the HMWF induced the expression of various inflammatory mediators, and enhanced the cellular migration of macrophages. These stimulatory effects of fucoidan decreased in fucoidans with lower molecular weights and LMWF did not exhibit any pro-inflammatory effects. Interestingly, the oral administration of HMWF enhanced the production of IFN-gamma, one of the Th1 cytokines, in collagen-stimulated spleen cells that had been isolated from CIA mice, while LMWF had the opposite effect. These results indicate that HMWF enhances arthritis through enhancing the inflammatory activation of macrophages while LMWF reduces arthritis through the suppression of Th1-mediated Immune reactions. Copyright (C) 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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

4.7
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